Embedded Files
(Eds). Thieme, 2014. Dr. Farooq Shahzad is dual fellowship trained, in craniofacial surgery and microsurgery. His main clinical interest is in head & neck reconstruction. He also performs trunk and extremity reconstruction, Mohs reconstruction and targeted muscle reinnervation. Dr. Shahzad’s research interests are in optimizing outcomes in head & neck reconstruction, sensory reconstruction in the head and neck and perforator mapping. Dr. Shahzad has a passion for global surgery. He is a regular visiting faculty at several academic medical centers in Pakistan where he operates and teaches plastic surgeons and residents. 26 Carrie Stern, MD Assistant Attending Surgeon Plastic and Reconstructive Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Education: MD, NYU School of Medicine Residencies: General Surgery – Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine Plastic Surgery - Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine Fellowships: Reconstructive Plastic Surgery/Microsurgery Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center 27 Selected publications: Schreiber JE, Stern CS, Jelks EB, Jelks GW, Tepper OM. 3D topographical surface changes in response to volumization of the lateral sub-orbicularis oculi fat compartment. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019 Dec 17. Daneshgaran G, Stern CS, Garfein ES. Reporting practices on immunosuppression and rejection management in face transplantation: a systematic review. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2019 Nov;35(9):652-661. Stranix JT, Stern CS, Rensberger M, Ganly I, Boyle JO, Allen RJ Jr, Disa JJ, Mehrara BJ, Garfein ES, Matros E. A virtual surgical planning algorithm for delayed maxillomandibular reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019 Apr;143(4):1197-1206. Schreiber JE, Terner J, Stern CS, Beut J, Jelks EB, Jelks GW, Tepper OM. The boomerang lift: a three-step compartment-based approach to the youthful cheek. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018 Apr;141(4):910-913. Dr. Stern joined the MSK Plastic Surgery Faculty after completing her Microsurgery Fellowship in 2019. Her clinical practice includes general reconstruction of complex defects in patients with cancer with a focus on breast reconstruction. She has particular interest in patient education and optimizing patient experience and clinical outcomes. Her research and clinical focus involves integrating technology, particularly 3D imaging and soft tissue analysis in patient care and the use 3D photography during consultation, in the operating room and to assess post-operative outcomes The World Wide Web has evolved into a global network linking more people, businesses, and institutions than any other single communication channel.1 It is an expansive tool with seemingly endless implications for the modern plastic surgery practice. The ease with which ideas can be exchanged through the Internet will undoubtedly continue to alter how we conduct the business aspects of our practices and the process by which patients make choices about the services we provide. In a recent study, Walden et al2 demonstrated the power of the Internet in influencing patients’ choices regarding breast augmentation. They reported that more than half of patients began their search for information about the procedure via Web searches: 41% with Google, 18% with a breast augmentation portal website (such as loveyourlook.com), and 11% with a plastic surgeon’s website. Only 10% first consulted with a plastic surgeon. Recognizing the vast power of the Internet, many plastic surgeons have developed practice websites to offer prospective patients information about their credentials, practice philosophy and facilities, and basic questionsand-answers about procedures. Yet most plastic surgery websites are static, rather than interactive, at a time when modern consumers have grown to expect a high degree of online interactivity. This expectation is evident in the increasing popularity of social networking and “social media.” The term social media includes many individual Internet applications that provide different but complementary functions. Facebook, Twitter, Linked-In, Google +, Yelp, and Realself are examples of social media or “social networking sites.” With Facebook boasting 750 million active registrants and Twitter claiming 175 million, there is obviously widespread and continued growth in this arena. As experience with social media outlets has increased, the applications for plastic surgery have grown far beyond personal communications. Plastic surgeons are entering this nontraditional marketing space in increasing numbers not only to connect with their patients but to educate the community, advertise, and remain competitive. Social media offer an inexpensive yet expansive marketing tool with built-in data tracking capabilities.3 Social networking sites that provide weekly reports on user activity—such as number of “hits” and user demographics—offer a method to help us begin to gauge return-on-investment. However, even if a surgeon has registered for a social media profile, how does he or she know that the page is reaching a large number of potential or existing patients? What characterizes these “social media users,” and do their demographics match those of our typical patient populations? Numerous surveys to investigate common characteristics of plastic surgery patients utilizing social media have demonstrated that they tend to be a
Google Sites
Report abuse