Anzeige
Erschienen in:
07.05.2019 | Original Article
Online and Social Media Footprint of All Swedish Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons
Erschienen in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery | Ausgabe 5/2019
Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhaltenAbstract
Background
The visual nature of the Internet and its newer technologies makes it naturally aligned to plastic and aesthetic surgery. While many studies have looked at the use of social media (‘SoMe’), they have been limited by either low response rate or limited scope. Our aim was to analyse a whole community of aesthetic plastic surgeons and their use of the Internet and social media platforms over a period of many years.
Methods
All active members of the Swedish national aesthetic plastic surgery society were identified. Webpages, professional (LinkedIn), social media (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram) and video-sharing (YouTube) accounts as well as online patient forum (Plastikoperationsforum) mentions of the surgeons and their clinics were identified, and corresponding platform-specific metrics were analysed.
Results
Of the 85 active members, 67 (78.9%) had a webpage on one of the 34 different clinic websites. The websites of older established clinics had a significantly better Alexa ranking than newer ones. Surgeons with a profile on Facebook or Instagram were significantly younger than those without an account. Twitter was the least preferred social media platform. Each surgeon had a mean 12.8 threads per year as compared to a mean 34.3 threads per clinic per year.
Conclusion
Most of the new practices established by Swedish aesthetic plastic surgeons in the last 10 years are single-surgeon ones. Instagram and Facebook accounts of their clinics seem to be the most popular SoMe platforms. Younger surgeons were more likely to have a Facebook or Instagram account and to be using two or more social media platforms. These data provide information about all aesthetic plastic surgeons registered with the Swedish national body and their increasing use of SoMe.
Level of Evidence V
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.