Social media: opportunities for quality improvement and lessons for providers-a networked model for patient-centered care through digital engagement.

Social media brings a new dimension to health care for patients, providers, and their support networks. Increasing evidence demonstrates that patients who are more actively involved in their healthcare experience have better health outcomes and incur lower costs. In the field of cardiology, social media are proposed as innovative tools for the education and update of clinicians, physicians, nurses, and medical students. This article reviews the use of social media by healthcare providers and patients and proposes a model of "networked care" that integrates the use of digital social networks and platforms by both patients and providers and offers recommendations for providers to optimize their use and understanding of social media for quality improvement.

Opioid-Related Public Health Communication Campaigns: An Environmental Scan.

The opioid overdose epidemic continues to devastate lives across the United States and has worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this paper, we review 166 online-accessible opioid-related campaigns to understand the current state of the science and practice of campaigns to address the opioid crisis. The findings suggest that health promotion practitioners can have a greater impact on reducing overdose deaths if they move beyond awareness-raising messaging about opioid misuse and place a greater emphasis on driving demand for evidence-based treatments such as medications for opioid use disorder and on reducing stigma related to treatment and recovery.

Perceived healthcare provider reactions to patient and caregiver use of online health communities.

OBJECTIVE: Many Internet users seek health information through online health communities (OHCs) and other social media. Yet few studies assess how individuals use peer-generated health information, and many healthcare providers (HCPs) believe OHCs interfere with patient-provider relationships. This study explored how individuals use OHC content in clinical discussions and how HCPs react to it. METHODS: We conducted in-person and virtual focus groups with patients/caregivers who visited OHCs (n=89). A trained moderator asked about reasons for membership, sharing OHC content with providers, HCP reactions, and preferred roles for HCPs. Two researchers independently coded verbatim transcripts (NVivo 9.2) and conducted thematic response analysis. RESULTS: Participants described OHCs as supplementing information from HCPs, whom they perceived as too busy for detailed discussions. Almost all participants shared OHC content with HCPs, although only half cited OHCs as the source. Most HCPs reacted negatively to OHC content, making participants feel disempowered. Despite these reactions, participants continued to use OHCs, and most desired HCP feedback on the accuracy of OHC content. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals do not use OHCs to circumvent HCPs but instead to gather more in-depth information. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: HCPs should discuss OHC content with patients to help them avoid misinformation and make more informed decisions.