Physician advertising and self promotion

Abstract

Advertising is a delicate area; from an ethical standpoint, it could be argued that banning advertising is the only way to avoid physicians preying on unwitting patients with false or deceptive claims that may encourage inappropriate healthcare utilization. On the other hand, advertising bans may promote restraint of trade, monopoly, and an exacerbation of the knowledge gap regarding therapeutic options and costs between physicians and patients. Dermatologists tend to think about advertising as a newspaper ad, a billboard, or the like. Yet there are many other forms of advertising and self-promotion that may be more insidious-and ethically fraught-such as selling cosmetic products in the office setting or even encouraging or advertising procedures that can be performed in the office. When a physician who is in a position of trust recommends a procedure or product, however, this is a much more ethically-laden step as the line between physician as patient advocate (with a fiduciary duty) and physician as business owner may become blurred. It is legitimate to advertise, and it is alright to speak of your accomplishments. Classically, advertising for differentiation has been looked down upon by the AMA, yet it is the cornerstone of society-level advertising campaigns such as those by the American Acvademy of Dermatology (see a board-certified dermatologist!) and other groups. Differentiation based on legitimate differences (or even appeals to what can be seen as legitimate yet unimportant differences) are not necessarily problematic.