Literature DB >> 28017529

What Patients Think About Their Interventional Radiologists: Assessment Using a Leading Physician Ratings Website.

Chika C Obele1, Richard Duszak2, C Matthew Hawkins2, Andrew B Rosenkrantz3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate patient satisfaction scores for interventional radiologists (IRs) across the United States using a leading physician ratings website.
METHODS: The physician ratings website Healthgrades was manually queried for all 2,774 Medicare-participating self-designated IRs. All patient-reviewed IRs for whom the primary "likelihood of recommending to family and friends" field was scored were included, resulting in 781 included IRs. Physician characteristics were extracted from Medicare data sets. All available patient satisfaction scores (1 [poor] to 5 [excellent]: likelihood to recommend, ease of scheduling, office environment, staff friendliness, trust in physician's decisions, how well physician explains condition, how well physician listens and answers questions, whether physician spends appropriate time with patients) and wait times were extracted from Healthgrades. Associations among measures were explored.
RESULTS: IRs' mean likelihood-to-recommend score was 4.3 ± 1.2 (median, 5.0; 64.5% received a score of 5; 10.5% received scores < 3). Mean scores ranged from 4.4 to 4.5 for office-related factors and from 4.3 to 4.5 for physician-related factors. Likelihood-to-recommend scores showed substantial correlations with office-related factors (r = 0.738 to 0.780) and physician-related factors (r = 0.918 to 0.946). Likelihood to recommend was significantly higher for IRs with shorter wait times (P < .001) but was not associated with physician gender or geographic region (P = 0.370-0.791), nor was there any correlation with physician age, years since graduation, or group practice size (r = -0.089 to 0.096).
CONCLUSIONS: Satisfaction scores on a leading physician ratings website generally range from very good to excellent for US IRs. Most patients leaving reviews are likely to recommend their own IRs to friends or family members. The likelihood to recommend is strongly associated with differences in wait times.
Copyright © 2016 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Interventional radiology; patient experience; patient satisfaction; social media

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28017529     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2016.10.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol        ISSN: 1546-1440            Impact factor:   5.532


  4 in total

1.  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

2.  Physicians' clinical experience and its association with healthcare quality: a systematised review.

Authors:  Soffien Chadli Ajmi; Karina Aase
Journal:  BMJ Open Qual       Date:  2021-11

3.  What Do Patients Think About Their Radiation Oncologists? An Assessment of Online Patient Reviews on Healthgrades.

Authors:  Arpan V Prabhu; Simrath Randhawa; David Clump; Dwight E Heron; Sushil Beriwal
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2018-02-06

4.  Data Quality Issues With Physician-Rating Websites: Systematic Review.

Authors:  Priya Anand; Shashank Shekhar; Priya Karadi; Pavankumar Mulgund; Raj Sharman
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2020-09-28       Impact factor: 5.428

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.