Darcy E Broughton1, Allison Schelble2, Kristina Cipolla2, Michele Cho3, Jason Franasiak4, Kenan R Omurtag2. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University School of Medicine, 4444 Forest Park Ave. Suite 3100, St. Louis, MO, 63108, USA. d.broughtond@wustl.edu. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University School of Medicine, 4444 Forest Park Ave. Suite 3100, St. Louis, MO, 63108, USA. 3. Seattle Reproductive Medicine, 1505 Westlake Ave. N. Suite 400, Seattle, WA, 98109, USA. 4. Reproductive Medicine Associates of New Jersey, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, 140 Allen Rd., Basking Ridge, NJ, 07920, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To elicit patient preferences for social media utilization and content in the infertility clinic. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional survey study conducted in three US fertility practices. Women presenting to the infertility clinic for an initial or return visit were offered an anonymous voluntary social media survey. The survey elicited patient perception of whether social media use in the infertility clinic is beneficial, and preferences regarding topics of interest. RESULTS: A total of 244 surveys were collected during the study period, of which 54.5% were complete. Instagram is a more popular platform than Twitter across all age groups. Use of both platforms varies by age, with patients ≥ 40 less likely to be active users. The majority of respondents felt that social media provided benefit to the patient experience in the infertility clinic (79.9%). "Education regarding infertility testing and treatment" and "Myths and Facts about infertility" were the most popular topics for potential posts, with 93.4 and 92.0% of patients endorsing interest respectively. The least popular topic was "Newborn photos and birth announcements," with only 47.4% endorsing interest. A little over half of respondents (56.3%) would feel comfortable with the clinic posting a picture of their infant. The vast majority of patients (96.2%) feel comfortable communicating electronically with their infertility clinic. CONCLUSION: Patients are interested in the use of social media as a forum for patient education and support in the infertility clinic. Patient preferences regarding post topics should be carefully considered.
PURPOSE: To elicit patient preferences for social media utilization and content in the infertility clinic. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional survey study conducted in three US fertility practices. Women presenting to the infertility clinic for an initial or return visit were offered an anonymous voluntary social media survey. The survey elicited patient perception of whether social media use in the infertility clinic is beneficial, and preferences regarding topics of interest. RESULTS: A total of 244 surveys were collected during the study period, of which 54.5% were complete. Instagram is a more popular platform than Twitter across all age groups. Use of both platforms varies by age, with patients ≥ 40 less likely to be active users. The majority of respondents felt that social media provided benefit to the patient experience in the infertility clinic (79.9%). "Education regarding infertility testing and treatment" and "Myths and Facts about infertility" were the most popular topics for potential posts, with 93.4 and 92.0% of patients endorsing interest respectively. The least popular topic was "Newborn photos and birth announcements," with only 47.4% endorsing interest. A little over half of respondents (56.3%) would feel comfortable with the clinic posting a picture of their infant. The vast majority of patients (96.2%) feel comfortable communicating electronically with their infertility clinic. CONCLUSION:Patients are interested in the use of social media as a forum for patient education and support in the infertility clinic. Patient preferences regarding post topics should be carefully considered.
Entities:
Keywords:
In vitro fertilization; Infertility; Internet; Patient outreach; Social media
Authors: Karin Hammarberg; Rebecca Zosel; Caroline Comoy; Sarah Robertson; Carol Holden; Mandy Deeks; Louise Johnson Journal: Hum Fertil (Camb) Date: 2016-10-25 Impact factor: 2.767
Authors: Muhammad Zikri Ab Aziz; Tengku Alina Tengku Ismail; Mohd Ismail Ibrahim; Najib Majdi Yaacob; Zakiah Mohd Said Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-09-29 Impact factor: 4.614