JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

The qualitative research presented in this paper investigates the outbreaks of diseases where a great amount of health-threatening misinformation is produced and released. Misinformation is often disseminated through social media, where information is spread rapidly and easily. As part of the pilot study, we examined the misinformation surrounding the Covid-19 outbreak to determine how it may have impacted practitioners' perceptions of misinformation, and how that may have influenced their practice. In particular, this study explored the answers to the following questions: How do health professionals respond when they discover a patient has been misinformed? What do they believe is the most impactful misinformation on healthcare practice? Are health professionals' practices changing as a result of misinformation? Are there any practices that were shaped by healthcare practitioners' perceptions of misinformation and its impact? Did they take any action or intervene in any way? What was the result of their action or intervention? Research findings indicate that Health Practitioners (HPs) view misinformation in different ways according to the scenario in which it occurs; some HPs consider it to be an acute incident exacerbated by the pandemic, while others see it as an ongoing phenomenon (always present) and are addressing it as part of their daily work. Considering that misinformation is primarily a result of the availability and accessibility of information, HPs reported their experiences with the current reliable and valid information available. At this point, HPS presented a range of perspectives on the available and trusted information sources. For them, reliable information may be available but outdated, untrusted by patients. HPs are developing pathways for dealing with misinformation. Two main pathways have been identified according to the research findings; first, to educate the patient through coaching, advising, or patronising. The second step is to devote resources such as time and effort to facilitate two-way communication between the patient and the healthcare provider through listening and talking to them. When it comes to the practicality and feasibility of the above pathways, HPs explained that there are a number of factors that play an important role in the treatment of misinformation. Last but not least, HPs mentioned challenges associated with misinformation and treatment, such as limited time and increased workload. Additionally, social media serves as a powerful echo chamber and word-of-mouth distribution medium. A surprising number of HPs have linked poor patient-HP communication and the difficulty in reaching HPs with the increasing use of social media. As a final recommendation, some Health Professionals suggest including the patient's voice and listening to their interpretations and explanations of the misinformation they receive and how they deal with it.