Abstract
Funding Acknowledgements
Type of funding sources: None.
Background
Nowadays, instant messaging (IM) provides fast and widespread communication. These platforms and apps enable the physicians to quickly share and send clinical data to their peers, to send information to their patients regarding their illnesses and to be reached for counselling and advise. Nevertheless, the use of IM has never been assessed in the cardiology community up until now.
Purpose
To assess the habits of cardiologists related to modern communication tools, their primary and secondary uses in clinical practice and the potential differences and preferences between different media in terms of ease of access, usefulness and trustworthiness.
Methods
An online survey was promoted by the EHRA e-Communication Committee and the EHRA Scientific Initiative Committee during the ESC Digital Health Week. All cardiologists were invited to participate via Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook and other dedicated channels. The survey consisted of 22 questions and was made anonymous. The questions were made on an individual-basis and collected on SurveyMonkey.
Results
287 physicians from 33 countries responded to the survey. The mean age of the respondents was 43.4 ± 11.5 years, and 74.8% of them were male. 88.3% of all respondents routinely sends and 90.3% receives clinical data through IM. IM is used at least once a week (36.4%) or even once or more a day (40.4%) for sharing clinical data. WhatsApp is the most used IM app to share clinical data (79.4%). On a scale of 1 to 5, IM was second only to face-to-face contact (average 4.46) as the preferred method for sharing clinical data (average 3.69) and was considered better than phone calls (average 3.34) and e-mails (average 3.21). Twelve-lead ECGs (88.6%), medical history (61.4%) and echo loops (55.7%) are the data shared most often. Among potential pros of IM, the respondents listed being a fast way of communication (82.0%) and making it easy to contact colleagues (76.7%), while privacy issues regarding IM apps providers (62.7%) and other colleagues (45.6%) were commonly perceived as drawbacks. Only 57.4% of all respondents anonymize clinical data before sharing them through IM, and only 44.0% of the data received are reported to be anonymized. Of note, 29.3% of the respondents were not aware of the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) on data protection at the time of the survey, and 29.8% do not know if their institution has a specific policy regarding the use of IM for professional use.
Conclusions
IM apps are used by cardiologists worldwide to share and discuss clinical data and are preferred to many other methods of data sharing, being second only to face-to-face contact. IM are often used and to share many different types of clinical data, being perceived as a fast and easy way of communication. Cardiologists should be sensitised to appropriate use of IM in accordance to GDPR and local policies in order to prevent legal and privacy issues.
Sensors data collection framework using mobile identification with secure data sharing model