Blog

Given that we’re writers of a blog that pertains to specific Seattle Surgery practice, we are definitely poised to participate in the discussion started by Dr. Pauline Chen in the New York Times.  She writes, “I blog, I tweet and I use Facebook,” saying they are “enormously useful” tools for her work.  Blogger Tara Parker-Pope responds by asking, “Do you think more doctors should be using social media?”

Keeping an open mind to new networking possibilities while focusing on the core responsibilities of your profession can be quite a juggling act.  The overwhelming stream of information that is characteristic of our age has led some people to simply shun networking tools that have become trendy, with Twitter perhaps being the most obvious example.  For what professional purpose would a physician send out 140 character tweets?  Well, there are a few reasons:

The value of social media for our surgical practice (this blog for example) is found in education, and in opening the channels for further correspondence.  We want to let the community know what we’re doing and how we might be of service.

Dr. Christian Sinclair, who maintains a blog about palliative care, tells the NYTimes,  “I can help to inform the public, I can put the knowledge I have out there. And if there are patients or families who need this knowledge, I can help them because of this network.”

When you’re seeking a physician with the right amount of expertise, getting out the yellow pages just won’t cut it anymore; it’s more convenient, and probably wiser, to get to know the doctor’s areas of expertise and surgical portfolio before scheduling a consultation, which in some cases may require traveling.

When it comes to the medical profession, the point is to provide a service, and for surgeons that service is actualized in the operating room. But that doesn’t mean surgeons shouldn’t augment the service they provide by using all the latest networking and communication tools this generation is so fortunate to have.

Archives of Facial Plastic Surgery recently published a study featuring a medical performance and safety evaluation of Dysport, the new wrinkle-reducing, Botox alternative, marketed by Medicis Pharmaceutical.  It focuses on use of Dysport for treatment of moderate – severe glabeller lines (forehead wrinkles), and the results appear mostly optimistic.

Government clearance for the drug should come later this year.  Dysport is being introduced by Medicis with the hope that it will be a direct competitor to Botox – a product that allowed Allergan Inc. to net $1.3 billion in revenue last year.

A dermatologist out of California who participated in the study commented to Bloomberg news, saying “the side effects are the same as Botox” and “many of our patients liked it even better.”

The active ingredients in Botox and Dysport are very similar; they each contain a particular ‘botulinum toxin’ that has been proven to relax the muscles that cause wrinkles in the face.

Few people may realize that Dysport has been sold overseas for years.  Nonetheless, Botox has claimed over 80 percent of the worldwide market.  One market analyst speculates that “[Dysport] may be priced 15 percent lower than Botox” which could allow it to take a significant share of that market.