Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
15th National Conference of the IAOMFP, Chennai, 2006
Abstract
Abstracts from current literature
Acne in India: Guidelines for management - IAA Consensus Document
Addendum
Announcement
Art & Psychiatry
Article
Articles
Association Activities
Association Notes
Award Article
Book Review
Brief Report
Case Analysis
Case Letter
Case Letters
Case Notes
Case Report
Case Reports
Clinical and Laboratory Investigations
Clinical Article
Clinical Studies
Clinical Study
Commentary
Conference Oration
Conference Summary
Continuing Medical Education
Correspondence
Corrigendum
Cosmetic Dermatology
Cosmetology
Current Best Evidence
Current View
Derma Quest
Dermato Surgery
Dermatopathology
Dermatosurgery Specials
Dispensing Pearl
Do you know?
Drug Dialogues
e-IJDVL
Editor Speaks
Editorial
Editorial Remarks
Editorial Report
Editorial Report - 2007
Editorial report for 2004-2005
Errata
Erratum
Focus
Fourth All India Conference Programme
From Our Book Shelf
From the Desk of Chief Editor
General
Get Set for Net
Get set for the net
Guest Article
Guest Editorial
History
How I Manage?
IADVL Announcement
IADVL Announcements
IJDVL Awards
IJDVL AWARDS 2015
IJDVL Awards 2018
IJDVL Awards 2019
IJDVL Awards 2020
IJDVL International Awards 2018
Images in Clinical Practice
In Memorium
Inaugural Address
Index
Knowledge From World Contemporaries
Leprosy Section
Letter in Response to Previous Publication
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor - Case Letter
Letter to the Editor - Letter in Response to Published Article
LETTER TO THE EDITOR - LETTERS IN RESPONSE TO PUBLISHED ARTICLES
Letter to the Editor - Observation Letter
Letter to the Editor - Study Letter
Letter to the Editor - Therapy Letter
Letter to the Editor: Articles in Response to Previously Published Articles
Letters in Response to Previous Publication
Letters to the Editor
Letters to the Editor - Letter in Response to Previously Published Articles
Letters to the Editor: Case Letters
Letters to the Editor: Letters in Response to Previously Published Articles
Medicolegal Window
Messages
Miscellaneous Letter
Musings
Net Case
Net case report
Net Image
Net Letter
Net Quiz
Net Study
New Preparations
News
News & Views
Obituary
Observation Letter
Observation Letters
Oration
Original Article
ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION
Original Contributions
Pattern of Skin Diseases
Pearls
Pediatric Dermatology
Pediatric Rounds
Perspective
Presedential Address
Presidential Address
Presidents Remarks
Quiz
Recommendations
Regret
Report
Report of chief editor
Report of Hon : Treasurer IADVL
Report of Hon. General Secretary IADVL
Research Methdology
Research Methodology
Resident page
Resident's Page
Resident’s Page
Residents' Corner
Residents' Corner
Residents' Page
Retraction
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
Revision Corner
Self Assessment Programme
SEMINAR
Seminar: Chronic Arsenicosis in India
Seminar: HIV Infection
Short Communication
Short Communications
Short Report
Special Article
Specialty Interface
Studies
Study Letter
Supplement-Photoprotection
Supplement-Psoriasis
Symposium - Contact Dermatitis
Symposium - Lasers
Symposium - Pediatric Dermatoses
Symposium - Psoriasis
Symposium - Vesicobullous Disorders
SYMPOSIUM - VITILIGO
Symposium Aesthetic Surgery
Symposium Dermatopathology
Symposium-Hair Disorders
Symposium-Nails Part I
Symposium-Nails-Part II
Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis
Tables
Technology
Therapeutic Guidelines
Therapeutic Guidelines - IADVL
Therapeutics
Therapy
Therapy Letter
View Point
Viewpoint
What’s new in Dermatology
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Letter to the Editor - Study Letter
2016:82:1;67-69
doi: 10.4103/0378-6323.171638
PMID: 26728815

What's up dermatology? A pilot survey of the use of WhatsApp in dermatology practice and case discussion among members of WhatsApp dermatology groups

Feroze Kaliyadan1 , KT Ashique2 , Soumya Jagadeesan3 , Boby Krishna4
1 Department of Dermatology, College of Medicine, King Faisal University, Hofuf, Saudi Arabia
2 Department of Dermatology, KIMS Al-Shifa Super Speciality Hospital, Perinthalmanna, Kerala, India
3 Department of Dermatology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Kochi, Kerala, India
4 Department of Dermatology, Government Taluk Hospital, Chengannur, Kerala, India

Correspondence Address:
Feroze Kaliyadan
Department of Dermatology, College of Medicine, King Faisal University, Hofuf - 31982
Saudi Arabia
How to cite this article:
Kaliyadan F, Ashique K T, Jagadeesan S, Krishna B. What's up dermatology? A pilot survey of the use of WhatsApp in dermatology practice and case discussion among members of WhatsApp dermatology groups. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2016;82:67-69
Copyright: (C)2016 Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology, and Leprology

Sir,

The latest trend in the use of social media in medicine is the use of smartphone based platforms such as WhatsApp ® for clinical case discussion. Capturing and sharing images on such platforms is very easy and effective responses can be obtained in a short time which improves decision-making ability. We attempted to evaluate the frequency and types of uses, advantages and disadvantages of WhatsApp ® based clinical discussion groups as perceived by members of a few such groups.

An online survey (designed using Survey Monkey ®) based on a convenience sampling method was sent to all members of three WhatsApp ® dermatology groups through the WhatsApp ® application itself. The questionnaire focussed on the amount of individual activity, satisfaction and perceptions regarding pros and cons of such platforms.

Sixty-one respondents (all dermatologists) completed the survey out of a total of about 100 in all three groups together, of which 38 were male and 23 were female. The age of the respondents ranged from 26 to 57 years (mean age 38.5 years). The groups had members ranging from residents to senior consultants. The years of experience varied from 1st year of residency (four of the respondents were residents) to 34 years with a mean experience of 9.5 years (experience of residents were put as zero for calculation of the mean).

Most of the respondents were members in multiple clinical case discussion groups. Of the total, 18 (29.5%) were members of only one group, 28 (46%) were members of two groups, 11 (18%) were members of three groups and 4 (6.5%) were members of four groups or more. Of the total, 15 (24.5%) respondents mentioned that they posted cases themselves at least once a week, 16 (26.2%) mentioned that their frequency of posting was around once a month, 17 (27.8%) posted infrequently and 13 (21.3%) had never posted cases themselves.

Regarding responding to cases posted by other members 9 (14.7%) responded daily, 22 (36%) responded at least a few times in a week, 27 (44.2%) responded at least once a week, while 3 (4.9%) never responded. When it came to non-clinical discussions, 20 (32.7%) participated often, 35 (57.3%) participated sometimes, while 6 (9.8%) never participated.

Fifty (81.9%) of the respondents were active in other web-based forums such as Facebook ® or other e-groups. Of these, 35 (70%) agreed and 17 (34%) strongly agreed that WhatsApp ® was a better forum for discussion of clinical cases.

The main advantages of WhatsApp ® as compared to other online forums, as perceived by the respondents included ease of image uploading and downloading (54 [88.5%] agreed or strongly agreed), a less time-consuming process (100% agreed/strongly agreed), faster responses (60 [98.3%] agreed or strongly agreed) and more number of relevant responses (49 [80.3%] agreed/strongly agreed).

The main limitations of using WhatsApp ® as mentioned by the respondents were issues with internet connectivity (42 [68.9%] agreed or strongly agreed on this point) and lack of adequate follow-up in many of the case discussions (37 [60.6%] of the respondents agreed/strongly agreed on this). As far as quality of the clinical photographs posted were concerned 33 (54%) of the respondents agreed/strongly agreed that this was a significant problem. Patient confidentiality was mentioned as an obstacle only by 23 (37.7%) of the respondents.

All the respondents agreed that discussions in their respective groups definitely helped to enrich their clinical knowledge in general, in terms of not only clinical cases discussions but also by sharing of learning resources both of relevant references/journal articles and of upcoming conferences or meetings relevant to the group.

Smartphones have been found to be effective in teledermatology for basic diagnosis and triage in spite of inherent limitations such as a lower image quality as compared to dedicated cameras.[1] An extension of the use of smartphones is in the form of clinical discussion groups based on mobile phone platforms such as WhatsApp ®. The concept of such groups is similar to web-based forums, e-groups or Facebook™ groups. The disadvantage of web-based forums especially e-mail based ones is that the process of sending, receiving and commenting on cases can be cumbersome and less spontaneous. Uploading, downloading, saving and viewing images is much more convenient with WhatsApp ®. An additional advantage is that the sender knows how many people have viewed the case making it easier to decide on whether to post reminders, if necessary.

A study by Johnston et al. analyzed the effectiveness of using WhatsApp ® as a communication method among members of an emergency surgery team. The study concluded that WhatsApp ® represents a rapid and efficient means of communication even in the context of emergency medicine. One of the key points the study highlighted was that participants felt a “flattening of the hierarchy” in the team.[2] This is something we also felt in our study as the members in the groups we studied ranged from fresh specialists and residents to experienced consultants, all of them contributing actively without inhibition.

Doctors have been increasingly using social media sites for professional and personal reasons including interacting directly with patients.[3] Patients also tend to use platforms such as WhatsApp ® for teleconsultations and follow-up. One interesting report documents the effective use of WhatsApp ® in post-stroke care.[4] The increased use of social media comes with issues related to patient confidentiality. In our study, a majority of the respondents felt that patient confidentiality was not a major issue. The fact that clear laws regarding patient confidentiality related to telemedicine are not formulated in our region might have influenced this opinion. A review of discussions in the studied groups show that most dermatologists took precautions to ensure that patient confidentiality was maintained even in lesions over the face. Over the course of time, clear guidelines on the use and transmission of clinical images in clinical discussion groups need to be formalized. The key caveat for the use of social media of any kind is to maintain physician professionalism at all costs.[5] Ideally, a consent form for taking photographs signed by the patient should be obtained from each patient and the same should explicitly and unambiguously state that the clinical images could be used for publication, presentation and electronic communications. This should ideally be done even for lesions not involving the face. Moreover, whenever there is an image showing the patient's face, the eyes should be masked to maintain confidentiality. In fact, we feel that the need for maintaining patient confidentiality is more in the context of social media such as WhatsApp ®, because the spread of data is sometimes difficult to control as compared to personal e-mails or restricted e-mail groups.

The limitations of using WhatsApp ® for clinical discussion seem to relate to the same problems associated with mobile teledermatology in general, internet connectivity and image quality.[1]

One of the main limitations of our study was the small sample size besides having all the inherent limitations of a cross-sectional survey which at best can assess perceptions of the target sample. At this stage, we also did not try to evaluate the types of clinical cases posted, the extent of effective conclusion of the discussions and the quality of the clinical images all of which are important factors in determining overall effectiveness of such clinical discussion platforms. We also realize that an ideal format would have been to follow-up and compare the responses for the same set of cases posted in WhatsApp ® and other online discussion forums. We hope to address these limitations in a follow-up study that is being planned.

Acknowledgments

We sincerely thank all the dermatologists of the WhatsApp ® groups of Cochin Dermatology Society, Malabar Dermatology Club, Kerala State, India and DERM friends group managed by one of the authors, for volunteering and participating in the survey with earnest enthusiasm without which this study would not have ever materialized.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

References
1.
Kaliyadan F, Amin TT, Kuruvilla J, Ali WH. Mobile teledermatology – Patient satisfaction, diagnostic and management concordance, and factors affecting patient refusal to participate in Saudi Arabia. J Telemed Telecare 2013;19:315-9.
[Google Scholar]
2.
Johnston MJ, King D, Arora S, Behar N, Athanasiou T, Sevdalis N, et al. Smartphones let surgeons know WhatsApp: An analysis of communication in emergency surgical teams. Am J Surg 2015;209:45-51.
[Google Scholar]
3.
Chretien KC, Kind T. Social media and clinical care: Ethical, professional, and social implications. Circulation 2013;127:1413-21.
[Google Scholar]
4.
Dey K. WhatsApp – An innovative solution for the stroke care. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2014;85:e4.
[Google Scholar]
5.
Grajales FJ 3rd, Sheps S, Ho K, Novak-Lauscher H, Eysenbach G. Social media: A review and tutorial of applications in medicine and health care. J Med Internet Res 2014;16:e13.
[Google Scholar]

Fulltext Views
639

PDF downloads
342
Show Sections