BackgroundSocial media are dynamic and interactive computer-mediated communication tools that have high penetration rates in the general population in high-income and middle-income countries. However, in medicine and health care, a large number of stakeholders (eg, clinicians, administrators, professional colleges, academic institutions, ministries of health, among others) are unaware of social media’s relevance, potential applications in their day-to-day activities, as well as the inherent risks and how these may be attenuated and mitigated.ObjectiveWe conducted a narrative review with the aim to present case studies that illustrate how, where, and why social media are being used in the medical and health care sectors.MethodsUsing a critical-interpretivist framework, we used qualitative methods to synthesize the impact and illustrate, explain, and provide contextual knowledge of the applications and potential implementations of social media in medicine and health care. Both traditional (eg, peer-reviewed) and nontraditional (eg, policies, case studies, and social media content) sources were used, in addition to an environmental scan (using Google and Bing Web searches) of resources.ResultsWe reviewed, evaluated, and synthesized 76 articles, 44 websites, and 11 policies/reports. Results and case studies are presented according to 10 different categories of social media: (1) blogs (eg, WordPress), (2) microblogs (eg, Twitter), (3) social networking sites (eg, Facebook), (4) professional networking sites (eg, LinkedIn, Sermo), (5) thematic networking sites (eg, 23andMe), (6) wikis (eg, Wikipedia), (7) mashups (eg, HealthMap), (8) collaborative filtering sites (eg, Digg), (9) media sharing sites (eg, YouTube, Slideshare), and others (eg, SecondLife). Four recommendations are provided and explained for stakeholders wishing to engage with social media while attenuating risk: (1) maintain professionalism at all times, (2) be authentic, have fun, and do not be afraid, (3) ask for help, and (4) focus, grab attention, and engage.ConclusionsThe role of social media in the medical and health care sectors is far reaching, and many questions in terms of governance, ethics, professionalism, privacy, confidentiality, and information quality remain unanswered. By following the guidelines presented, professionals have a starting point to engage with social media in a safe and ethical manner. Future research will be required to understand the synergies between social media and evidence-based practice, as well as develop institutional policies that benefit patients, clinicians, public health practitioners, and industry alike.

Videoconferencing technologies can vastly expand the reach of healthcare practitioners by providing patients (particularly those in rural/remote areas) with unprecedented access to services. While this represents a fundamental shift in the way that healthcare professionals care for their patients, very little is known about the impact of these technologies on clinical workflow practices and interprofessional collaboration. In order to better understand this, we have conducted a focused literature review, with the aim of providing policymakers, administrators, and healthcare professionals with an evidence-based foundation for decision-making. A total of 397 articles focused on videoconferencing in clinical contexts were retrieved, with 225 used to produce this literature review. Literature in the fields of medicine (including general and family practitioners and specialists in neurology, dermatology, radiology, orthopedics, rheumatology, surgery, cardiology, pediatrics, pathology, renal care, genetics, and psychiatry), nursing (including hospital-based, community-based, nursing homes, and home-based care), pharmacy, the rehabilitation sciences (including occupational and physical therapy), social work, and speech pathology were included in the review. Full utilization of the capacity of videoconferencing tools in clinical contexts requires some basic necessary technical conditions to be in place (including basic technological infrastructure, site-to-site technological compatibility, and available technical support). The available literature also elucidates key strategies for organizational readiness and technology adoption (including the development of a change management and user training plan, understanding program cost and remuneration issues, development of organizational protocols for system use, and strategies to promote interprofessional collaboration).

No abstract

A qualitative approach was used to explore the readiness of a rural community for the implementation of telehealth services. There were four domains of interest: patient, practitioner, public and organization. Sixteen semistructured telephone interviews (three to five in each domain) were carried out with key informants and recorded on audio-tape. Two community awareness sessions were held, which were followed by five audio-taped focus groups (with five to eight people in each) in the practitioner, patient and public domains. In addition, two in-depth interviews were conducted with community physicians. Analysis of the data suggested that there were four types of community readiness: core, engagement, structural and non-readiness. The level of readiness varied across domains. There were six main themes: core readiness; structural readiness; projection of benefits; assessment of risk; awareness and education; and intra-group and inter-group dynamics. The results of the study can be used to investigate the readiness of rural and remote communities for telehealth, which should improve the chance of successful implementation.

Faculties (i.e., schools) of medicine along with their sister health discipline faculties can be important organizational vehicles to promote, cultivate, and direct interprofessional education (IPE). The authors present information they gathered in 2007 about five Canadian IPE programs to identify key factors facilitating transformational change within institutional settings toward successful IPE, including (1) how successful programs start, (2) the ways successful programs influence academia to bias toward change, and (3) the ways academia supports and perpetuates the success of programs. Initially, they examine evidence regarding key factors that facilitate IPE implementation, which include (1) common vision, values, and goal sharing, (2) opportunities for collaborative work in practice and learning, (3) professional development of faculty members, (4) individuals who are champions of IPE in practice and in organizational leadership, and (5) attention to sustainability. Subsequently, they review literature-based insights regarding barriers and challenges in IPE that must be addressed for success, including barriers and challenges (1) between professional practices, (2) between academia and the professions, and (3) between individuals and faculty members; they also discuss the social context of the participants and institutions. The authors conclude by recommending what is needed for institutions to entrench IPE into core education at three levels: micro (what individuals in the faculty can do); meso (what a faculty can promote); and macro (how academic institutions can exert its influence in the health education and practice system).