The treatise of ethical and professional conduct in plastic surgery social media requires unique consideration.1 The combination of self-imposed pressures to outdo similar content and the public’s hunger for “medutainment” creates a milieu whereby patient interests may be compromised.2 Several frameworks, including the American Society of Plastic Surgeons code of ethics, have addressed the ethical requirements of social media content.1,3,4 Professionalism, as Preminger et al.5 aptly pointed out, transcends rules prescribed by ethical guidelines. Its inclusion of the manner by which surgeons conduct themselves on the Internet is frequently overlooked. The evolving use of new forms of media via SnapChat, Instagram stories, or Facebook Live brings another dimension requiring evaluation.
We have identified four considerations when determining the professionalism of a social media post: context, intent, content, and presentation. Context, commonly overlooked, can represent an insidious lapse in professionalism. An innocuous post, such as one commenting on the end of the workweek, can become problematic when done while performing surgery, as it can trivialize the patient’s experience. Certain types of surgical procedures, such as aesthetic cases, will inherently receive more attention due to cultural predisposition. Careful scrutiny is warranted in these situations.
Intention refers to the purpose of the post. If the purpose is to promote one’s practice or educate the public, it likely has professional intention. Self-promotion should be carried out on a separate, personal account.
The next consideration is content—the subject matter of the post. After complying with ethical guidelines (i.e., compliance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act), the surgeon should ask, “Would this picture/video be accepted for publication by a medical journal?” The post should include a simple picture or video of the result or technique being presented. Any dialogue should include professional language accessible to the public to prevent use of insensitive, colloquial, or immature language. Sensationalism with gratuitous graphic images and playful indifference to surgical specimens need be avoided. If the physician is present, he or she should use the pose or demeanor one would use when taking a professional headshot or picture for a departmental or professional website.
The final consideration is the presentation of the post. Emojis and filters should not be used, as they are playful and can trivialize the trust patients have bestowed upon the surgeon. Hashtags and other commentary should be put in the description or comments section of the social media platform in the style of a journal figure legend or table title, and professional language should be used (#liposuction instead of #losethefat!; “Video of fat tissue removal during liposuction,” instead of “Look at all the fat sucked out during liposuction!”).
Ultimately, the public expects professional conduct from their plastic surgeons. In a public survey, we recently found that graphic surgical images and personal posts used with the intention of drawing more followers can in fact alienate certain demographics (Fan et al., unpublished data). Though we have offered a framework for maintaining professionalism, it is an interative process, as technology, especially #SocialMedia, outpaces codified ethical and professional guidelines. Thus, they should be examined regularly and frequently.
Dr. Song is a prominent user of social media in plastic surgery. He also receives royalties from Elsevier for Plastic Surgery: Volume 4. Lower Extremity, Trunk, and Burns, third and fourth editions, and Biomet Microfixation for the SternaLock. None of the other authors has any financial interests to disclose. No funding was received for this article.
Peter T. Hetzler III
Yale University School of Medicine
New Haven, Conn.
Jessica Wang, M.D.
Kenneth L. Fan, M.D.
David H. Song, M.D., M.B.A.
Department of Plastic Surgery
MedStar Georgetown University Hospital
1. Bennett KG, Berlin NL, MacEachern MP, Buchman SR, Preminger BA, Vercler CJ. The ethical and professional use of social media in surgery: A systematic review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;142:388e–398e.
2. Bennett KG, Vercler CJ. when is posting about patients on social media unethical “medutainment”? AMA J Ethics 2018;20:328–335.
3. Dorfman RG, Vaca EE, Fine NA, Schierle CF. The ethics of sharing plastic surgery videos on social media: Systematic literature review, ethical analysis, and proposed guidelines. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;140:825–836.
5. Preminger BA, Hansen J, Reid CM, Gosman AA. The divergence of ethics and professionalism in the social media arena. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;141:1071–1072.
Viewpoints, pertaining to issues of general interest, are welcome, even if they are not related to items previously published. Viewpoints may present unique techniques, brief technology updates, technical notes, and so on. Viewpoints will be published on a space-available basis because they are typically less timesensitive than Letters and other types of articles. Please note the following criteria:
- Text—maximum of 500 words (not including references)
- References—maximum of five
- Authors—no more than five
- Figures/Tables—no more than two figures and/or one table
Authors will be listed in the order in which they appear in the submission. Viewpoints should be submitted electronically via PRS’ enkwell, at www.editorialmanager.com/prs/. We strongly encourage authors to submit figures in color.
We reserve the right to edit Viewpoints to meet requirements of space and format. Any financial interests relevant to the content must be disclosed. Submission of a Viewpoint constitutes permission for the American Society of Plastic Surgeons and its licensees and assignees to publish it in the Journal and in any other form or medium.
The views, opinions, and conclusions expressed in the Viewpoints represent the personal opinions of the individual writers and not those of the publisher, the Editorial Board, or the sponsors of the Journal. Any stated views, opinions, and conclusions do not reflect the policy of any of the sponsoring organizations or of the institutions with which the writer is affiliated, and the publisher, the Editorial Board, and the sponsoring organizations assume no responsibility for the content of such correspondence.