To think this is wildly inappropriate use of SM?

[Thatsnotmyotter]

I follow an old acquaintance on Instagram who works for the NHS in a support role. Today on his Instagram feed there was a photograph of a patient’s ECG. There were no identifying details on the print out that I can see, however it was an abnormal trace and it would be quite easy to work out who it belonged to if you were that person’s relative or doctor I would have thought based on location and the results. I’m 99% sure it goes against the policy of the trust he works for to post stuff like this. (I also work for the NHS albeit for a different trust.)

AIBU to consider reporting this? I just feel like if you’re posting stuff like that on a public forum, you’re probably also doing other hugely stupid and disrespectful stuff tbh.

This is a member of staff posting an ECG report of a patient? Definitely report him.

Are you sure that it would have be identifiable? Lots of people have heart conditions and would produce similar ECGs.

Why not message him directly warning him this is innaprorpriate / could get him into trouble and ask him to take it down?

Hopefully he can then learn by his mistake without losing his job.

It’s totally inappropriate, you need to report him to Information Governance.

What an absolute fucking arse hole, its not his info to share. Why did he put it on SM? Definitely report him.

In what context was it shared? I don't understand why anyone would do that, unless it was shared as part of an awareness thing, and had the permission of the patient.

Why on earth did he post a patients Ecg? Was there any comment to give it context? Total breach of confidentiality even if not named. I would suspect the mere taking a photo of it with a personal camera would be against policy let alone publishing it on SM

I don’t see how an ecg tracing with no name etc is identifiable.
Lots of people present with weird heart blocks and fibrillations.

Why would he do that?! What's the context??

If it is a patient's (rather than a stock image?) then it's completely unacceptable.

Even if it isn’t identifiable I still think it’s really inappropriate. Did the patient know do you think?

If it’s not identifiable there is nothing to suggest that it’s not his own or some else he knows who he has permission from. I doubt he would get in trouble.

Apart from the fact that he shouldn't have done it,I can't understand WHY he would. What was the point of it?

What was the comment with it ?

You haven't given any information,. he might have taken a lift from the internet

How do you know it was a patients ECG and not a sample ECG? There is no way you could identify a patient based on an ECG alone, even a very abnormal one

I can't imagine anyone doing this without permission. It would be professional suicide. Was there a context to it?

I'd just assume he had permission and was supposed to do it tbh.

As a GP, I can't imagine how an ECG with no patient identifiers on it would be identifiable Lots of people have heart blocks, arrhythmias etc. I see your point about the trace containing the name of the Trust and a time stamp, and he should have obscured those identifiers before sharing. But I must admit I couldn't identify any of my patients from their ECGs and I'm not sure even a top cardiologist could!

I don’t see how an ecg tracing with no name etc is identifiable. Lots of people present with weird heart blocks and fibrillations

This. it is not unusual for health professionals to share unidentifiable stuff like this or (for example) teachers to share redacted data sets on a teaching forum.

The issue is why was he sharing it? If it's to make some public health point, then fair enough.

If it's for amusement and he explicitly states (for example) it's a patient he saw this afternoon, then more of a problem.

I just feel like if you’re posting stuff like that on a public forum, you’re probably also doing other hugely stupid and disrespectful stuff tbh.

Well, if you catch him doing whatever terrible things you suspect him of then certainly grass him up.

Report.

Other people's medical records are not his to publish.

report

Instagram should remove it right away I hope?

did the poor patient even give consent for this?

I don't agree a random ECG is easily identifiable- and depends on the context of the posting. Also have you established consent wasn't given, or you are assuming?

What reason is given for sharing it? Is it a health promotion/ raising awareness thing?

It does seem like a very odd thing to do but the context is relevant

This. it is not unusual for health professionals to share unidentifiable stuff like this or (for example) teachers to share redacted data sets on a teaching forum.

Not on SM though. It’s never appropriate to share anything like this on SM without consent and even then it’s dicey if it’s your personal account.

It’s never appropriate to share anything like this on SM without consent and even then it’s dicey if it’s your personal account.

I agree in principle but it depends completely on context:

A generic post about the importance of heart health with an unidentifiable picture of an ECG that OP is guessing is a patient is fine.

A post saying "hur, look at the arrhythmia on the fat bastard I treated at 3.15 in Sometown Hospital today- you should have laid off the pies Colin" is perhaps a tad unprofessional.

Rubbish, do you know how many ECG we do every day? I can 100% guarantee that we would not be able to identify a patient just through looking at an ECG