Affiliation:
1. Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif.
2. Department of Plastic Surgery, University of California Irvine, Orange, Calif.
Abstract
Background:
Social media and online advertising are increasingly used by plastic surgeons (PSs) to educate patients and obtain referrals, but it remains unclear whether the general public can distinguish the difference in training and accreditation among medical professionals advertising online. Our study elucidates the public’s expectations regarding the distinction between plastic surgery and facial plastic surgery.
Methods:
A survey was distributed via MTurk, an Amazon surveying service, to collect information about demographics and assumptions that would be made solely based on the terminology “facial PS” (FPS) and “PS.” Participants were restricted to those residing in the United States.
Results:
A total of 253 responses were collected. Based on the term FPS, respondents on average moderately to strongly agreed that they would expect an FPS to have completed a plastic and reconstructive surgery residency program (mean = 1.81; scale from 1= strongly agree to 5= strongly disagree) and would feel moderately to strongly misled if they visited an FPS for a consultation and later learned that the provider did not complete a plastic and reconstructive surgery residency (mean = 3.62; scale from 1 = not misled at all to 5 = extremely misled).
Conclusions:
Despite increasing advocacy by professional societies and the member societies of the American Board of Medical Specialties, this study demonstrated that the lay public is unaware of factually different training and certification pathways given similarity in nomenclature. This study was notably not designed to draw conclusions or imply superiority of one specialty, certifying board, or training model over the other.
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献