Journal of Medical EthicsThursday 16 December 2010, 1:50PM
Media release from Journal of Medical Ethics
[Facebook activity of residents and fellows and its impact on the
doctor-patient relationship Online First 2010
doi10.1136/jme.2010.036293]
Doctors with a profile on the social networking site Facebook may
be compromising the doctor-patient relationship, because they don't
deploy sufficient privacy settings, indicates research published
online in the Journal of Medical Ethics.
The authors base their findings on a survey of the Facebook
activities of 405 postgraduate trainee doctors (residents and
fellows) at Rouen University Hospital in France. Half those sent
the questionnaire returned it.
Almost three out of four respondents (73%) said they had a Facebook
profile, with eight out of 10 saying they had had a presence on the
site for at least a year. Those with a profile tended to be
slightly younger than those who didn't.
One in four (24%) logged on to the site several times a day, but
almost half (49%) logged on once a day or several times a week. The
rest were rather more infrequent users of the site.
Almost half believed that the doctor-patient relationship would be
changed if patients discovered their doctor held a Facebook
account. But three out of four said this would only happen if the
patient was able to access their profile.
Virtually all (97%-99%) displayed sufficient personal information
for them to be identified, including their real name and their
birth dates. And 91% displayed a personal photo. Just over half
displayed their current post (55%) while 59% provided information
on their current university training site.
Over half claimed to change at least one of the default privacy
settings (61%), but 17% couldn't remember if they had done this.
Those who had been on the site for under a year were less likely to
limit access to the content of their profile.
Only a few Facebookers had received a friend request from a patient
(6%), four of whom accepted it. But such requests are likely to
become more common, suggest the authors
While most respondents (85%) said they would automatically refuse a
friend request from a patient, one in seven (15%) said they would
decide on a case by case basis.
The reasons given for accepting a patient as a friend included
feeling an affinity with them and fear of embarrassing or losing
that patient if they declined.
The need to keep a professional distance or the suspicion that the
patient was interested in a romantic relationship, were the primary
reasons given for rejecting the request. Although a high proportion
of doctors considered that such interaction might be unethical,
this reason came bottom of the list.
"This new interaction (whether it is romantic or not) results in an
ethically problematic situation because it is unrelated to direct
patient care," say the authors.
"Moreover public availability of information on a doctor's private
life may threaten the mutual confidence between doctor and patient
if the patient accesses information not intended for them."
And they warn: "Doctors must be aware that comments and pictures
posted online may be misinterpreted outside their original context
and may not accurately reflect their opinions and real-life
behaviour. This information could also become accessible to people
that it was not intended for."