Patients who record NHS care for TikTok or Instagram ‘put themselves at risk'
The Society of Radiographers (SoR) said filming NHS staff and treatments was causing workers unnecessary anxiety when they are trying to work, while people also risk publishing other patients' medical information.
The organisation also suggested that distracting staff and making them uncomfortable may compromise the delivery of treatment.
The SoR is calling for clear and widespread NHS policies that prevent patients from photographing or filming clinical procedures without permission.
Ashley d'Aquino, a therapeutic radiographer working in London, said a rising number of patients are choosing to film their own medical treatment for social media such as TikTok or Instagram.
She told the SoR's Annual Delegates' Conference that she had been approached by other members of staff, in her capacity as union rep, over patients recording some of their cancer treatment.
She added: 'I had one patient whose relative started filming while I was trying to set up the treatment.
'It wasn't the right time – I was trying to focus on delivering the treatment.
'We had another member of staff who agreed to take photos for a patient.
'But when the patient handed over her phone, the member of staff saw that the patient had also been covertly recording her to publish on her cancer blog.
'As NHS staff, we wear name badges, so our names will be visible in any video.
'It makes people feel very uncomfortable and anxious.'
A radiology department assistant from the south coast was using a cannular on a cancer patient, and the patient's 19-year-old daughter started filming the procedure.
'She wanted to record the cannulation because she thought it would be entertaining on social media,' she said. 'But she didn't ask permission.
'In the next bay, a patient was having consent taken for a virtual colonoscopy, which is an invasive and potentially embarrassing procedure.
'That could have all been recorded on the film – including names and dates of birth.
'Anyone could be in the room – you don't know their personal story.
'There are people who come into our department who have a limited social media presence because of risks to their safety. Patients filming make them feel unsafe in their own hospital.
'I spent the weekend afterwards worrying: did I do my job properly? I know I did, but no-one's perfect all the time, and this was recorded. I don't think I slept for the whole weekend.'
The department assistant said she had also seen patients attempting to take photos of her department's scanners.
'People on social media start discussing what's going on without understanding what the scanner is or what it does,' she said.
'But they know it involves radiation. So that may create fear among people.'
Dean Rogers, SoR director of industrial strategy and member relations, said the issue affects all health workers.
'As healthcare professionals, we need to think: does that recording breach the confidentiality of other patients? Does it breach our ability to deliver care?,' he said.
'There are hospital trusts that have very good policies around patients taking photos and filming procedures.
'But this is something all trusts need to have in place. Patients shouldn't be filming in hospitals without staff knowledge and permission.
'Hospitals need to ensure that they meet the needs of patients while also looking after staff members' wellbeing.
'And, in this case, safeguarding the one simultaneously safeguards the other – allowing healthcare professionals to do their job in safety, while also protecting patients' privacy and helping them to receive the best possible care.'
Ms d'Aquino said there may be some valid reasons for patients to record medical conversations.
'Patients making audio recordings of consultations, for example, can enhance their understanding and retention of medical information,' she said.
'The difficulty is that our phones have become so much a part of our day-to-day life that recording and sharing our lives has become second nature.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
33 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Top investors in GP surgery firm Assura oppose £1.7bn bid from US private equity giant KKR
Assura's major shareholders have opposed a tie-up with a US private equity giant. Top ten investors Quilter Cheviot and Schroders, which own around 6 per cent and 5 per cent of shares in the NHS landlord respectively, favour a deal with London-listed rival Primary Health Properties (PHP) over US buyout giant KKR. Allianz, Gravis, Baillie Gifford and Columbia Threadneedle have also leant their support to PHP's bid. Shareholders argued that KKR's proposal undervalues Assura, which owns GP surgeries, hospitals and hospices across the UK. A deal with KKR and its partner Stonepeak would see buildings leased to the NHS fall into the hands of overseas owners. But a takeover by PHP would retain the properties under the ownership of a London-listed business. Assura this week said it would weigh up an improved bid from PHP, despite having backed KKR's £1.7billion offer last week. Marcus Phayre-Mudge, manager of Columbia Threadneedle's TR Property Investment Trust, said: 'The KKR bid simply doesn't offer a premium significant enough to justify walking away from this long-term opportunity. 'That's why we strongly support the PHP-Assura merger and encourage other shareholders to do the same.' A Gravis fund manager said PHP's offer was a 'superior choice for long-term investors'. The KKR bid 'risks crystallising value at what may be a cyclical low', they added. Baillie Gifford investment manager Jon Stewart said the KKR deal was not 'in shareholders' best interests' and 'undervalues Assura's long-term growth potential'. KKR's 'best and final' bid values the company at 52.1p per share, although that includes already declared dividends. Without those, the offer is worth 50.42p, analysts said. Most recently, PHP offered £1.68billion to buy Assura but argued last week that its cash and stock bid is worth more as the value is based on share prices. Assura shares slid 0.1 per cent, or 0.05p, to 50.1p. City exodus goes on Direct Line and Ashtead have moved a step closer to joining the exodus from the London stock market. The £3.7billion takeover of insurer Direct Line by Aviva is set to complete next month after talks with the competition watchdog. Aviva said it is pressing ahead with plans for a court to sanction the deal on July 1. This would see the insurer swallowed up by its larger rival and leave the market. Equipment rental firm Ashtead said it is on course to switch its main stock market listing to New York in early 2026. In the past month, drug maker Indivior and fintech firm Wise said they would switch their main listing to New York.
Channel 4
2 hours ago
- Channel 4
How new technologies can help improve the nation's health
A simple test for the genetic risk of cardiovascular disease has been developed which, alongside the current risk assessment by GPs, could prevent 20,000 cases of CVD over 10 years, it is claimed. Seven million people in the UK live with the disease and it is responsible for one in four deaths. 40 to 55-year-olds are already assessed by their GPs for their risk of developing CVD and sometimes put on statins (which lower cholesterol levels in the blood) – as a prevention. But it is a calculated risk. Professor Ahmet Fuat led the trial into the new test – called 'the Health Insight Test.' He found that in 13% of cases it significantly changed the risk of CVD. 'So some patients , the risk was downgraded. Some patients, around 8%, it was upgraded to high or very high, and the patients then were able to make a better judgment and decision on what they did, ' he said. This could be by taking statins or modifying their lifestyles. What they found out most of all from the trial was that the test fitted in well with the way GPs currently work. However the test, which has been approved by the medical regulator the MHRA, is yet to be taken up by the NHS and is only available through a private insurance provider. No figures have been made available as to how much it would cost the NHS. Genomics are the Oxford based company behind the new test. We asked their CEO Professor Sir Peter Donnelly how likely he thought it was that the NHS would take up his innovation? 'It fits in very well with the Secretary of State's focus on moving from sickness to prevention, on the idea of us being much better at understanding individualised risk and personalising healthcare. So this plays absolutely into that, and it has substantial benefits in terms of preventing disease.' Prevention is one of the three shifts that will be in the 10 year health plan the government is due to publish shortly and we understand within that, one of the sections will be on personalised medicine, using technologies like genomics. The issue for the NHS will be ensuring new technologies are able to make their way from the drawing board to the frontline. Tim Horton, from the think tank the Health Foundation, said the litmus test for the 10 year plan is not simply to champion innovation but to have a more sophisticated approach to making it happen at scale around the NHS. 'It is not just having the technology that gets you the benefits but implementing it and using it effectively in the real world,' Mr Horton said. Revealed: NHS maternity units with most missing midwives The reasons behind 'serious' NHS nursing shortages in England 'Disturbing': Jeremy Hunt responds to NHS investigation
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Assisted dying ‘could be Trojan Horse that breaks NHS'
Assisted dying 'could become the Trojan horse that breaks the NHS,' the Commons has heard. MPs are due to vote on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on Friday, which could see it either progress to the House of Lords or fall. It will be the first time the Bill has been voted on in its entirety since the historic vote in November when MPs supported the principle of assisted dying for England and Wales by a majority of 55. On Tuesday, Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary, was questioned about the availability of money to fund such moves. Last year, Mr Streeting voted against the Bill and has since indicated he remains opposed, reiterating that the Government is taking a neutral stance on it. Dame Siobhain McDonagh, a Labour MP opposed to the Bill, said an assisted dying service could 'rob our stretched NHS of much-needed resources'. She said: 'When asked in the House of Commons, the Secretary of State for Health made clear to MPs that there is no money allocated to the NHS to fund the assisted dying Bill. 'It's now clear that the assisted dying Bill will rob our stretched NHS of much-needed resources and could become the Trojan horse that breaks the NHS, the proudest institution and the proudest measure in our Labour Party's history. 'We already know from the impact assessment that this new system could cost tens, if not hundreds of millions of pounds, making our mission to cut waiting times and rebuild our NHS harder. I urge Labour MPs not to vote for the assisted dying Bill to protect the vulnerable and our NHS.' Mr Streeting was asked by the Labour MP Katrina Murray, who opposed the Bill, whether the NHS had the money to fund assisted dying on top of its other priorities. She said: 'If passed, the assisted dying Bill would make thousands of terminally ill people every year eligible to end their lives on the NHS. Does our health service have the money to fund this service as well as its priority of bringing down waiting lists?' Mr Streeting responded: 'Of course, the Government is neutral [on assisted dying]. It's for the House to decide. 'There isn't money allocated to set up the service in the Bill at present, but it's for members of this House and the Lords, should the Bill proceed, to decide whether or not to proceed and that's a decision that this Government will respect either way.' Mr Streeting said last year that there were 'choices and trade-offs', adding that 'any new service comes at the expense of other competing pressures and priorities'. Last week, Mr Streeting said the NHS was 'in a fight for its life' as he described his mission to turn the health service around. 'Not about pounds or pence, but the human cost' An impact assessment published by the Government last month estimated that the operational costs of setting up an assisted dying service could be up to £13.6 million a year. The assessment suggested there could be up to 4,500 assisted deaths in a decade, saving the taxpayer up to £90 million in healthcare and benefits and pensions payments. Kim Leadbeater, the Bill sponsor, has said the proposed legislation is about giving dying people choice at the end of their lives, saying it is 'about the human cost' and 'not about pounds and pence'. She has described her Bill as the 'most robust piece of legislation in this area in the world'. Dozens of Labour MPs called for Friday's overall vote to be delayed, asking Lucy Powell, the Commons Leader, for more time to scrutinise a Bill they say is 'perhaps the most consequential piece of legislation that has appeared before the House in generations'. But a Government spokesman pointed out that it is a private members' Bill and 'the amount of time for debate is therefore a matter for the House'. Supporters of the Bill say it is coming back to the Commons with better safeguards after more than 90 hours of parliamentary time spent on it to date. But opponents claim the process has been rushed and that the Bill is weaker than it was when first introduced last year. A key change was the replacement of a High Court judge requirement for sign-off of applications from terminally ill people, with a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist. As it stands, the proposed legislation would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and the three-member panel. While the Bill has the backing of some MPs from medical backgrounds, concerns have been raised by the Royal Colleges of Physicians and Psychiatrists.
