Literature DB >> 27703422

Rating a Sports Medicine Surgeon's "Quality" in the Modern Era: an Analysis of Popular Physician Online Rating Websites.

Benedict U Nwachukwu1, Joshua Adjei1, Samir K Trehan1, Brenda Chang1, Kelms Amoo-Achampong2, Joseph T Nguyen1, Samuel A Taylor1, Frank McCormick2, Anil S Ranawat1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Consumer-driven healthcare and an increasing emphasis on quality metrics have encouraged patient engagement in the rating of healthcare. As such, online physician rating websites have become mainstream and may play a potential role in future healthcare policy. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate online patient ratings for US sports medicine surgeons, determine predictors of positive ratings and analyze for inter-website scoring correlation.
METHODS: The American Orthopedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM) member directory was sampled. Surgeon demographic and rating data were searched on three online physicians rating websites: HealthGrades.com (HG), RateMDs.com (RM) and Vitals.com (V). Written rating comments were categorized as relating to the following: surgeon competence, surgeon affability and process of care. Bivariate linear regression, Pearson correlation and multivariable analyses were used to determine factors associated with positive ratings.
RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-five sports medicine surgeons were included. Two hundred seventy-one (99%) had ratings on at least one of the three websites. Sports surgeons were rated highly across all three websites (mean >4.0/5); however, there was only a low to moderate degree of correlation among websites. On HG, female surgeons and surgeons in academia were more likely to receive higher overall ratings. Across all three websites, increased number of years in practice inversely correlated with ratings; this relationship neared significance for HG and was significant for RM. A surgeon's online presence or geographic location was not associated with higher ratings. In multivariable regression analysis for ratings on HG, female sex was the only significant predictor of higher ratings. Two thousand three hundred forty-one written comments were analyzed: perceived surgeon competence and communication influenced the direction of ratings for the top and bottom tier surgeons.
CONCLUSION: There was a low degree of correlation among online websites for surgeon ratings. Female surgeons and those with fewer years in practice appear to have higher ratings on these websites; comment content analysis suggests that high and low ratings are influenced by perceived surgeon competence and affability.

Entities:  

Keywords:  healthcare policy; online surgeon ratings; quality; sports medicine

Year:  2016        PMID: 27703422      PMCID: PMC5026665          DOI: 10.1007/s11420-016-9520-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  HSS J        ISSN: 1556-3316


  19 in total

1.  Public awareness, perception, and use of online physician rating sites.

Authors:  David A Hanauer; Kai Zheng; Dianne C Singer; Achamyeleh Gebremariam; Matthew M Davis
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2014-02-19       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Physician-rating websites.

Authors:  James E Sabin
Journal:  Virtual Mentor       Date:  2013-11-01

Review 3.  Current status of cost utility analyses in total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review.

Authors:  Benedict U Nwachukwu; Kevin J Bozic; William W Schairer; Jaime L Bernstein; David S Jevsevar; Robert G Marx; Douglas E Padgett
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-09-30       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Online reviews of orthopedic surgeons: an emerging trend.

Authors:  Chelsea Frost; Addisu Mesfin
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 1.390

5.  Doctor-rating websites base their reports on only a few patient reviews.

Authors:  Janice Hopkins Tanne
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2013-01-15

Review 6.  Cost-effectiveness analyses in orthopaedic sports medicine: a systematic review.

Authors:  Benedict U Nwachukwu; William W Schairer; Jaime L Bernstein; Emily R Dodwell; Robert G Marx; Answorth A Allen
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2014-08-14       Impact factor: 6.202

7.  Online Patient Ratings of Hand Surgeons.

Authors:  Samir K Trehan; Christopher J DeFrancesco; Joseph T Nguyen; Resmi A Charalel; Aaron Daluiski
Journal:  J Hand Surg Am       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 2.230

8.  Online reviews of 500 urologists.

Authors:  Chandy Ellimoottil; Alissa Hart; Kristin Greco; Marcus L Quek; Ahmer Farooq
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-12-07       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Trends of online ratings of otolaryngologists: what do your patients really think of you?

Authors:  Lindsay Sobin; Parul Goyal
Journal:  JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 6.223

10.  Who uses physician-rating websites? Differences in sociodemographic variables, psychographic variables, and health status of users and nonusers of physician-rating websites.

Authors:  Ralf Terlutter; Sonja Bidmon; Johanna Röttl
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2014-03-31       Impact factor: 5.428

View more
  12 in total

1.  Association of Patient Volume With Online Ratings of California Urologists.

Authors:  Gregory P Murphy; Mohannad A Awad; Anas Tresh; Thomas W Gaither; E Charles Osterberg; Nima Baradaran; Benjamin N Breyer
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 14.766

2.  Pearls: How to Address Negative Online Patient Reviews.

Authors:  H John Cooper
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Computerized Adaptive Testing for Patient Reported Outcomes in Ankle Fracture Surgery.

Authors:  Elizabeth B Gausden; Ashley Levack; Benedict U Nwachukwu; Danielle Sin; David S Wellman; Dean G Lorich
Journal:  Foot Ankle Int       Date:  2018-07-04       Impact factor: 2.827

4.  How wait-times, social media, and surgeon demographics influence online reviews on leading review websites for joint replacement surgeons.

Authors:  Dhanur Damodar; Chester J Donnally; Johnathon R McCormick; Deborah J Li; Giuseppe V Ingrasci; Martin W Roche; Rushabh M Vakharia; Tsun Y Law; Victor H Hernandez
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2019-01-25

5.  Web-Based Physician Ratings for California Physicians on Probation.

Authors:  Gregory P Murphy; Mohannad A Awad; E Charles Osterberg; Thomas W Gaither; Thanabhudee Chumnarnsongkhroh; Samuel L Washington; Benjamin N Breyer
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2017-08-22       Impact factor: 5.428

6.  Scope, Breadth, and Differences in Online Physician Ratings Related to Geography, Specialty, and Year: Observational Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Jessica Janine Liu; John Justin Matelski; Chaim M Bell
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2018-03-07       Impact factor: 5.428

7.  What Do Patients Say About Doctors Online? A Systematic Review of Studies on Patient Online Reviews.

Authors:  Y Alicia Hong; Chen Liang; Tiffany A Radcliff; Lisa T Wigfall; Richard L Street
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2019-04-08       Impact factor: 5.428

8.  Gender, Soft Skills, and Patient Experience in Online Physician Reviews: A Large-Scale Text Analysis.

Authors:  Zackary Dunivin; Lindsay Zadunayski; Ujjwal Baskota; Katie Siek; Jennifer Mankoff
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2020-07-30       Impact factor: 5.428

9.  Negative Online Ratings of Joint Replacement Surgeons: An Analysis of 6,402 Reviews.

Authors:  Casey Imbergamo; Andrzej Brzezinski; Aneesh Patankar; Matthew Weintraub; Natale Mazzaferro; Stephen Kayiaros
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2021-06-15

10.  Assessing Patient Experience and Healthcare Quality of Dental Care Using Patient Online Reviews in the United States: Mixed Methods Study.

Authors:  Bradley S Henson; Robert D Stevenson; Simon Hong; Ye Lin; Y Alicia Hong; Tianchu Lyu; Chen Liang
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2020-07-07       Impact factor: 5.428

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.