JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

As we are witnessing the evolution of social media (SM) use globally among the general population, popularity of SM has also been embraced by healthcare professionals. In the context of SM evolution and exponential growth of users, this rapid review summarizes recent findings about e-professionalism of healthcare professionals (HCPs).

Objective:

The objective of our study was to review and characterize the original peer-reviewed research studies published from November 1, 2014 to November 31,, 2018 on e-professionalism of healthcare professionals, to assess the quality of methodologies and approaches used, to explore the impact of social media on e-professionalism of healthcare professionals recognizing benefits and dangers of social media and to provide insights to guide future research in this area.

Methods:

A search of the literature was performed in December 2018 using 3 databases (PubMed, CINAHL and Scopus). The searches were conducted using the following defined search terms: 'professionalism’ AND 'social media' OR 'Internet' OR ‘Facebook’ OR ‘Twitter’ OR ‘Instagram’. The search strategy was limited to studies published in English. This rapid review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and the Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews guidelines.

Results:

Of the 709 retrieved papers, a total of 58 studies were finally included in this review. Overall, the quality of the studies was satisfactory. Participants in the reviewed studies were from diverse healthcare professions. Medical health professionals were involved in about three-quarters of the studies. Three key benefits of SM on e-professionalism of HCPs were identified: 1) professional networking and collaboration, 2) professional education and training and 3) effectiveness of educational interventions about e-professionalism or impact of existing SM policies. For the selected studies, there are five recognized dangers of SM on e-professionalism of HCPs: 1) loosening accountability, 2) compromising confidentiality, 3) blurred professional boundaries, 4) depiction of unprofessional behavior, and 5) legal issues. This rapid review also recognizes recommendations for changes in educational curricula regarding e-professionalism or adopting novel approaches to existing SM policies as opportunities for improvement and barriers that influence HCPs use of SM in the context of e-professionalism.

Conclusions:

Findings in reviewed studies indicate existence of both benefits and dangers of SM on e-professionalism of HCPs. Even though there are some barriers recognized, this review has highlighted existing recommendations for including e-professionalism in educational curricula of HCPs. Based on all evidence provided, this review provided new insights and guides for future research on this area. There is a clear need for robust research to investigate new emerging SM platforms, the efficiency of guidelines and educational interventions, and the specifics of each profession regarding their SM potential and usage. Clinical Trial: PROSPERO CRD42019131532; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42019131532