Social Media's Impact on Health Information: What Can Nurses Do?

[Tonya Lynn RN]

Social Media

Social Media has shifted the way health-related information is created and consumed. This shift has many advantages in educating and reaching a broad audience. Freedom of speech and the age of social media has produced quite the contrast between well-researched data and misinformation. Unfortunately, with so many potential resources available to the public, valid and trustworthy information can become lost. Nurses can use their expertise to share accurate health information via social media. 

Information Overload

The general population lacks access to high-quality, evidence-based research broken down into easily digestible terms. When confronted with a new diagnosis, most patients will reach for their smartphone or tablet and perform a quick Google search. The information they receive is abundant and can either be a current well-researched data-driven article or misinformed bias. For example, a simple Google search for "diabetes" netted about 4,090,000,000 results in 0.71 seconds, an overwhelming number of results. Yet, the average person will click on the first few and consider this their "research,” not realizing the information could be outdated, inaccurate, or irrelevant. 

The Infodemic

Social media includes well-known sites such as facebook, Instagram, Tiktok, and Wiki. It also includes blogs, micro-blogs, websites, podcasts, eBooks, smartphone apps, videos, and video games. Health misinformation (false information) and disinformation (incorrect information intended to deceive) spread rapidly among these various sites and can lead to public hysteria. Ultimately, this can result in poor patient outcomes. The issue has become so prevalent that it was declared a public health threat by the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations (UN), and the Office of the Surgeon General of the United States (OSG)¹. During the Covid-19 Pandemic, the term Infodemic, though not new, was used to describe the spread of false and potentially harmful disease and vaccine information². 

Nurses Voice

Current, reliable, easy-to-understand health information is needed across all platforms. Nurses were voted the most trustworthy profession for 20 consecutive years through Gallup's Most Honest and Ethical Professions Poll³, evidence that they are trusted. As a result, nurses are in a prime position to use their voices on social media to educate and guide the public properly. While much help is needed to combat the spread of false health information, nurses have the opportunity to use their presence on social media to provide up-to-date, accurate information. Further, they can use social media to remain current in their practice. Their combined efforts can work to promote positive health outcomes. 

Nurses as Educators

Through social media, the nurse can expand their reach and promote positive health outcomes by:

• Alerting the public to concerning trends
• Provide links to supporting research on topics of discussion
• Encouraging the public to maintain a critical mind when seeking online health information, as what they find may not be accurate
• Discouraging the public from self-diagnosing 
• Directing people to available resources 
• Encouraging the use of free community health hotlines run by medical professionals
• Educating the public to be cautious of the promise of quick-fix products 
• #Hashtag important topics 

Nurses as Students

Nurses can advance their practice by using social media to:

• Initiate or participate in online groups
• Network professionally
• Share information
• Continue their education
• Stay up to date with healthcare trends
• Seek out resources to keep up with trending media methods

Nurses should consider health literacy and avoid speaking to their audience using technical jargon. They should be cautious and abide by best practices to prevent HIPAA breaches. Further, they should refrain from providing diagnosis and treatment recommendations outside the nursing scope. Instead, nurses should direct people to seek advice from their primary care providers in these instances.

Conclusion

In this digital age, information can instantly spread across the globe. Unfortunately, this includes misinformation regarding essential health topics. Much is needed to combat the mistruths present. With so many passionate and opinionated individuals, nurses may be apprehensive about attempting to dispel false information for fear of being publicly attacked. Nurses can, however, proactively use social media to build trust with their patients and the public by providing meaningful, accurate, and current health information. Further, they can advance their practice by continuing to seek out opportunities to learn and grow. Collectively, we can confront the evolving Infodemic, all in the name of positive patient outcomes. 

How do you feel about personally using social media to educate the public? Would you feel comfortable correcting false health information knowing heated debates can occur?

---

References/Resources

¹Confronting Health Misinformation: The U.S. Surgeon General's Advisory on Building a Healthy Information Environment

²Infodemic: World Health Organization (WHO)

³Military Brass, Judges Among Professions at New Image Lows: GALLUP

[toomuchbaloney]

28 minutes ago, Davey Do said:

Empirical knowledge is that information which is gained by direct observation.

For example, antipsychotics act as dopamine antagonists in order to abate the inappropriate behavior in patients diagnosed with schizophrenia. This basically means that the excessive dopamine secreted by the presynaptic cleft in the neuron is not received by the receptor in the post synaptic cleft. The inappropriate behavior is decreased due to the interruption of the electrical chemical process in the brain.

This information was not learned empirically, it was learned through reading and discussion, and was accepted because it was logical.

Never having seen a neurotransmitter or synaptic cleft, the information is accepted purely on the basis that it makes sense and was not gained empirically.

Is that information that you feel is generally shared with patients by nurses?

[Davey Do]

In formation shared with patients on the mechanisms in regard to their treatment needs to be titrated to their level of understanding.

Merely using statements like, "Your disease is caused by a chemical imbalance in your brain and the medication corrects that imbalance" works with the majority of the mentally ill population. Those patients with higher levels of abilities, specifically for example a DVM, the above rote memory explanation was used and understood.

[toomuchbaloney]

4 minutes ago, Davey Do said:

In formation shared with patients on the mechanisms in regard to their treatment needs to be titrated to their level of understanding.

Merely using statements like, "Your disease is caused by a chemical imbalance in your brain and the medication corrects that imbalance" works with the majority of the mentally ill population. Those patients with higher levels of abilities, specifically for example a DVM, the above rote memory explanation was used and understood.

But is that reflective of the majority of information that is given to patients by nurses about their health or treatment. In my experience it is not.  But I'm open to consider this from a different perspective. 

I think that most patients hear from nurses that a treatment or medication offers this or that potential benefit/risk. The comments about desired effect and expected patient response are largely based in empirically gained knowledge, right?

[Davey Do]

Knowledge through observation- intervention and results- is a form of empirical knowledge.

If a nurse says something like, "I've seen many times that the administration of an antipsychotic will decrease inappropriate behavior", that is relayed empirical knowledge.

However, if the nurse says, "This antipsychotic decreases inappropriate behavior by regulating a chemical imbalance in the brain", that information is not empirically learned.

Another case in point: The literature states something along the lines of, "SSRIs theoretically work through keeping the serotonin levels high in the synaptic cleft". 

They really don't know how SSRIs work, but that's a good theory and one that's been accepted, explained to patients, and they were at ease with the explanation.

[toomuchbaloney]

5 hours ago, Davey Do said:

Knowledge through observation- intervention and results- is a form of empirical knowledge.

If a nurse says something like, "I've seen many times that the administration of an antipsychotic will decrease inappropriate behavior", that is relayed empirical knowledge.

However, if the nurse says, "This antipsychotic decreases inappropriate behavior by regulating a chemical imbalance in the brain", that information is not empirically learned.

Another case in point: The literature states something along the lines of, "SSRIs theoretically work through keeping the serotonin levels high in the synaptic cleft". 

They really don't know how SSRIs work, but that's a good theory and one that's been accepted, explained to patients, and they were at ease with the explanation.

OK

But, again I would argue that most nurse patient communications aren't that granular or detailed because most nurses are not the prescribing, nor dispensing professional.  The prescribing professional has the obligation to provide that level of explanation for use of the drug.  Certainly when answering specific patient questions nursing professionals may reference relevant and recommended resource material.  They/we are at ease with the information because there is no presented evidence which contradicts the theory or their/our observed experience with the drugs. 

I feel like I'm missing something here. 

[Davey Do]

The education process is like a production with a multitude of occurrences that must take place for the show to go on. The audience doesn't come to see the stagehands build the set, or the actors to reheorifice, they come to see the final outcome, the performance.

Like a well-trained actor, a prudent nurse will be knowledgeable about as many aspects as possible in order to do their job well. With one patient, the nurse may be a standup comedian, with another a Shakespearian performer.

The actor's part, and the moment of patient teaching are links in a chain. Although the actor or the nurse may not have the lead role, they are intricate to the process.

[toomuchbaloney]

4 hours ago, Davey Do said:

The education process is like a production with a multitude of occurrences that must take place for the show to go on. The audience doesn't come to see the stagehands build the set, or the actors to reheorifice, they come to see the final outcome, the performance.

Like a well-trained actor, a prudent nurse will be knowledgeable about as many aspects as possible in order to do their job well. With one patient, the nurse may be a standup comedian, with another a Shakespearian performer.

The actor's part, and the moment of patient teaching are links in a chain. Although the actor or the nurse may not have the lead role, they are intricate to the process.

Should an education include information which is not empirically gained by the educator? 

[Hoosier_RN, MSN]

On 9/2/2022 at 1:36 PM, Truth66 said:

At the end of March 2020, I sent a lengthy detailed email to every minister of health across Canada, as well as our federal health minister.  The email was based on my 15 plus years working in LTC and working through numerous different respiratory outbreaks.  Not one of them, or any member of their staff replied.  Various emails were sent to different public officials during the course of the Pandemic and the majority of them were also not replied to. 

 

You shouldn't allow yourself to take this personal. Back at that time, I'm sure that these folks were inundated with so much information and phone calls, email, regular mail, texts, etc, that it was most likely hard to keep up. Also, as far as taking advice from any nurse or Dr, public officials have a "chain of command",  so to speak, that have had their credentials verified, etc. Anyone can send an email claiming to have knowledge and facts. The receiver doesn't always have the tools, or time, to verify that person, or their facts. 

I do agree that it's sad that many public officials all over the world didn't follow their own guidelines, then wanted to wag their finger at their population who broke protocols as well

[Truth66]

4 hours ago, Hoosier_RN said:

You shouldn't allow yourself to take this personal. Back at that time, I'm sure that these folks were inundated with so much information and phone calls, email, regular mail, texts, etc, that it was most likely hard to keep up. Also, as far as taking advice from any nurse or Dr, public officials have a "chain of command",  so to speak, that have had their credentials verified, etc. Anyone can send an email claiming to have knowledge and facts. The receiver doesn't always have the tools, or time, to verify that person, or their facts. 

I do agree that it's sad that many public officials all over the world didn't follow their own guidelines, then wanted to wag their finger at their population who broke protocols as well

Thank you for your kind words.  I have seen numerous other examples of where even highly experienced doctors were and continue to be ignored.  I think part of my frustration is that the vast majority of what has happened with COVID 19 (in Canada at least) should never have happened.  We had the SARS Commission which released its reports in 2006.  The Commission and its reports were intended to prevent another major incident like SARS.  Those reports were essentially ignored and shelved during COVID 19.

Instead many of our public officials allowed things like Social Media to spin out of control with false information and were not doing anywhere near enough to combat it.  I will give alot of doctors credit who were trying to do their part by appearing in numerous news broadcasts. 

My biggest overall concern is that if these public health officials don't get their act together (especially with regards to dealing with false information in Social Media) we're going to be in real trouble if the next Pandemic is far deadlier than COVID 19.  

[Jenni Binford]

Thanks Davey, for that short and sweet walk down neurotransmission alley. I forgot about the pre and post synaptic cleft. I have been thinking a lot recently about schizophrenia and it has been popping up in everything lately. 

I'm putting together a pitch for an article regarding treatment modalities for people that no longer respond well to antipsychotics. I appreciate this explanation of empiric knowledge vs. studying to obtain knowledge. Emperic is kin to organic I guess?!

Fun read, thanks

 

[Erin Lee, BSN, RN]

I gave up on it for a while due to the polarity of things the last few years.  I am trying to find a better way to go about it. As we all know there is NO CONVINCING some people, but others may be open to the conversation and learning. I am personally learning to find the opportunities where the other person will be open to receive that information and have a conversation about it. While also learning when the conversation will go no where and to just leave it. 

I think most of us can relate to the serenity prayer in some way and this is one of those things I like to apply it to ...

Grant me the serenity to accept what I can not change

the courage to change the things I can

and the wisdom to know the difference. 

[Truth66]

Well said about the serenity prayer.