Skip to main content
Top
Published in: World Journal of Urology 6/2020

01-06-2020 | Care | Topic Paper

Making surgery safer in an increasingly digital world: the internet—friend or foe?

Authors: H. Van Puyvelde, M. Basto, A. S. J. Chung, S. Van Bruwaene

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 6/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The internet has resulted in huge efficiency gains in health care, the ability to deal with massive data accumulation and better manage patient data. However, potential and real pitfalls exist, including breeches in security of data and patient confidentiality, data storage issues, errors, and user interface issues.

Methods

A MEDLINE review was performed using MeSH terms “health care” and “information technology.” Cross-referencing was used to explore the different opportunities and challenges the internet has to offer.

Results

As health professionals, we are fast adopting technologies at our fingertips, such as WhatsApp and video capabilities, into our clinical practice to increase productivity and improve patient care. However, the potential security breaches are significant for the health professional and health service. Further, electronic medical records have theoretical advantages to improve patient care, reduce medication errors, and expedite referrals. The downside is a less personalized approach to patient care, as well as the potential for these systems to be even more cumbersome. In regard to the acquisition of knowledge, there is no doubt the internet is our friend. Health care professionals as well as patients have unlimited resources for learning, including podcasts videos, apps, simulators, and wearable devices. Unfortunately, this comes with a risk of misinformation and poorly referenced data with little to no regulation of content.

Conclusion

In this increasing digital world, it is our task as health care providers to embrace these new technologies but develop guidelines and control systems to minimize the pitfalls.
Literature
2.
go back to reference Downing NL, Bates DW, Longhurst CA (2018) Physician burnout in the electronic health record era: are we ignoring the real cause? Ann Intern Med 169(1):50–51CrossRef Downing NL, Bates DW, Longhurst CA (2018) Physician burnout in the electronic health record era: are we ignoring the real cause? Ann Intern Med 169(1):50–51CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Kroth J, Morioka-Douglas N, Veres S et al (2019) Association of Electronic Health Record design and use factors with clinician stress and burnout. JAMA Netw Open 2(8):e199609CrossRef Kroth J, Morioka-Douglas N, Veres S et al (2019) Association of Electronic Health Record design and use factors with clinician stress and burnout. JAMA Netw Open 2(8):e199609CrossRef
4.
go back to reference O’Sullivan DM, O’Sullivan E, O’Connor M et al (2017) WhatsApp doc? BMJ Innov 3:238–239CrossRef O’Sullivan DM, O’Sullivan E, O’Connor M et al (2017) WhatsApp doc? BMJ Innov 3:238–239CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Nikolic A, Wickramasinghe N, Claydon-Platt D et al (2018) The use of communication apps by medical staff in the Australian Health Care System: survey study on prevalence and use. JMIR Med Inform 6(1):e9CrossRef Nikolic A, Wickramasinghe N, Claydon-Platt D et al (2018) The use of communication apps by medical staff in the Australian Health Care System: survey study on prevalence and use. JMIR Med Inform 6(1):e9CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Sener TE, Buttice S, Sahin B et al (2018) WhatsApp use in the evaluation of hematuria. Int J Med Inform 111:17–23CrossRef Sener TE, Buttice S, Sahin B et al (2018) WhatsApp use in the evaluation of hematuria. Int J Med Inform 111:17–23CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Stahl I, Dreyfuss D, Ofir D et al (2016) Reliability of smartphone-based teleradiology for evaluating thoracolumbar spine fractures. Spine J 17(2):161–167CrossRef Stahl I, Dreyfuss D, Ofir D et al (2016) Reliability of smartphone-based teleradiology for evaluating thoracolumbar spine fractures. Spine J 17(2):161–167CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Borgmann H, Cooperberg M, Murphy D et al (2018) Online professionalism—2018 update of European Association of Urology (atUroweb) recommendations on the appropriate use of social media. Eur Urol 74:644–650CrossRef Borgmann H, Cooperberg M, Murphy D et al (2018) Online professionalism—2018 update of European Association of Urology (atUroweb) recommendations on the appropriate use of social media. Eur Urol 74:644–650CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Jayakumar N, Brunckhorst O, Dasgupta P et al (2015) e-Learning in surgical education: a systematic review. J Surg Educ 72(6):1145–1157CrossRef Jayakumar N, Brunckhorst O, Dasgupta P et al (2015) e-Learning in surgical education: a systematic review. J Surg Educ 72(6):1145–1157CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Rapp A, Healy M, Charlton M et al (2017) Youtube is the most frequently used educational video source for surgical preparation. J Surg Educ 73(6):1072–1076CrossRef Rapp A, Healy M, Charlton M et al (2017) Youtube is the most frequently used educational video source for surgical preparation. J Surg Educ 73(6):1072–1076CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Rodriguez A, Young M, Jackson H et al (2018) Viewer discretion advised: is Youtube a friend or foe in surgical education? Surg Endosc 32:1724–1728CrossRef Rodriguez A, Young M, Jackson H et al (2018) Viewer discretion advised: is Youtube a friend or foe in surgical education? Surg Endosc 32:1724–1728CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Larouche M, Geoffrion R, Lazare D et al (2016) Mid-urethral slings on Youtube: quality information on the internet? Int Urogynecol J 27:903–908CrossRef Larouche M, Geoffrion R, Lazare D et al (2016) Mid-urethral slings on Youtube: quality information on the internet? Int Urogynecol J 27:903–908CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Isaac T, Zheng J, Jha A (2012) Use of UpToDate and outcomes in US hospitals. J Hosp Med 7(2):85–90CrossRef Isaac T, Zheng J, Jha A (2012) Use of UpToDate and outcomes in US hospitals. J Hosp Med 7(2):85–90CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Sarbaz M, Kimiafar K, Banaye Yazdipour A (2017) Physicians' use of online clinical evidence in Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. Iran Stud Health Technol Inform 236:343–347PubMed Sarbaz M, Kimiafar K, Banaye Yazdipour A (2017) Physicians' use of online clinical evidence in Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. Iran Stud Health Technol Inform 236:343–347PubMed
16.
go back to reference Thelwall M, Haustein S, Larivière V et al (2013) Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other web services. PLoS ONE 8(5):e64841CrossRef Thelwall M, Haustein S, Larivière V et al (2013) Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other web services. PLoS ONE 8(5):e64841CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Pereira-Azevedo N, Carrasquinho E, Cardosos de Oliveira E et al (2015) mHealth in urology: a review of experts' involvement in app development. PLoS ONE 10(5):e0125547CrossRef Pereira-Azevedo N, Carrasquinho E, Cardosos de Oliveira E et al (2015) mHealth in urology: a review of experts' involvement in app development. PLoS ONE 10(5):e0125547CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Walsh K (2016) Social media and surgery: an alternative view. Surgery 159(3):978CrossRef Walsh K (2016) Social media and surgery: an alternative view. Surgery 159(3):978CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Dameff C, Clay B, Longhurst C (2019) Personal health records: more promising in the smartphone era? JAMA 321(4):339–340CrossRef Dameff C, Clay B, Longhurst C (2019) Personal health records: more promising in the smartphone era? JAMA 321(4):339–340CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Rexhepi H, Ahlfeldt RM, Cajander A et al (2018) Cancer patients’ attitudes and experiences of online access to their electronic medical records: a qualitative study. Health Inform J 24(2):115–124CrossRef Rexhepi H, Ahlfeldt RM, Cajander A et al (2018) Cancer patients’ attitudes and experiences of online access to their electronic medical records: a qualitative study. Health Inform J 24(2):115–124CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Tang P, Lee T (2009) Your doctor’s office or the internet? Two paths to personal health records. N Engl J Med 360(13):1276–1278CrossRef Tang P, Lee T (2009) Your doctor’s office or the internet? Two paths to personal health records. N Engl J Med 360(13):1276–1278CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Lawrentschuk L, Sasges D, Tasevski R et al (2012) Oncology health information quality on the internet: a multilingual evaluation. Ann Surg Oncol 19:706–713CrossRef Lawrentschuk L, Sasges D, Tasevski R et al (2012) Oncology health information quality on the internet: a multilingual evaluation. Ann Surg Oncol 19:706–713CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Janssen S, Fahlbusch F, Käsmann L et al (2019) Radiotherapy for prostate cancer: DISCERN quality assessment of patient-oriented websites in 2018. BMC Urol 19(1):42CrossRef Janssen S, Fahlbusch F, Käsmann L et al (2019) Radiotherapy for prostate cancer: DISCERN quality assessment of patient-oriented websites in 2018. BMC Urol 19(1):42CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Gul M, Diri MA (2019) Youtube as a source of information about premature ejaculation treatment. J Sex Med 16(11):1734–1740CrossRef Gul M, Diri MA (2019) Youtube as a source of information about premature ejaculation treatment. J Sex Med 16(11):1734–1740CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Daraz L, Morrow A, Ponce O et al (2019) Can patients trust online health information? A meta-narrative systematic review addressing the quality of health information on the internet. J Gen Intern Med 34(9):1884–1891CrossRef Daraz L, Morrow A, Ponce O et al (2019) Can patients trust online health information? A meta-narrative systematic review addressing the quality of health information on the internet. J Gen Intern Med 34(9):1884–1891CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Hanauer DA, Zheng K, Singer DC et al (2014) Public awareness, perception, and use of online physician rating sites. JAMA 311(7):734–735CrossRef Hanauer DA, Zheng K, Singer DC et al (2014) Public awareness, perception, and use of online physician rating sites. JAMA 311(7):734–735CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Widmer J, Maurer M, Nayar V et al (2018) Online physician reviews do not reflect patient satisfaction survey responses. Mayo Clin Proc 93(4):453–457CrossRef Widmer J, Maurer M, Nayar V et al (2018) Online physician reviews do not reflect patient satisfaction survey responses. Mayo Clin Proc 93(4):453–457CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Daskivich T, Houman J, Fuller G et al (2018) Online physician ratings fail to predict actual performance on measures of quality, value, and peer review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 25(4):401–407CrossRef Daskivich T, Houman J, Fuller G et al (2018) Online physician ratings fail to predict actual performance on measures of quality, value, and peer review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 25(4):401–407CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Making surgery safer in an increasingly digital world: the internet—friend or foe?
Authors
H. Van Puyvelde
M. Basto
A. S. J. Chung
S. Van Bruwaene
Publication date
01-06-2020
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keyword
Care
Published in
World Journal of Urology / Issue 6/2020
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03145-8

Other articles of this Issue 6/2020

World Journal of Urology 6/2020 Go to the issue