The Ethics and Responsibilities of Social Media Usage by Plastic Surgeons: A Literature Review

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Social media has revolutionised how plastic surgeons advertise their work and promote their services, but concerns have been raised regarding the ethics of these practices. This review aims to identify said concerns and develop measures to address them. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane and Medline were searched for studies assessing the ethics of social media use by plastic surgeons. Five search terms were used and 23 studies identified. Results were catalogued according to which principle of medical ethics was infringed. RESULTS: Autonomy: Patients must not be coerced into allowing their operative media to be shared and content anonymised by removing identifiable features and scrubbing metadata. Beneficence: It is difficult to balance the benefit to patients of posting photographs for educational purposes with the risk of identifiable features being present, particularly within craniofacial surgery. Non-maleficence: Taking operative media could be a distraction from the patient and lengthen the procedure which could lead to harm. Any content posted on social media should be adapted to avoid trivialisation or sexualisation. Justice: Surgeons should not entertain their audience to increase their following at the expense of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Greater oversight of social media use by plastic surgeons is required to avoid patient harm and tarnishing of the specialty's professional standing. Professional bodies should be tasked with devising a course dedicated to the responsible use of these platforms. This should ensure the public's trust in the specialty does not become eroded and patients are not harmed by unethical social media use. This review highlights the relevant shortfalls of SoMe use by plastic surgery Several proposals are made to reduce the incidence of these shortfalls and to ensure SoMe is used in a professional and responsible manner It also lists areas of the specialty where SoMe is underused and could be of help, such as academia LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors http://www.springer.com/00266 .

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 35 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.