Literature DB >> 28853024

Does experience matter? A meta-analysis of physician rating websites of Orthopaedic Surgeons.

R A Jack1, M B Burn1, P C McCulloch1, S R Liberman1, K E Varner1, J D Harris2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review evaluating online ratings of Orthopaedic Surgeons to determine: (1) the number of reviews per surgeon by website, (2) whether the number of reviews and rate of review acquisition correlated with years in practice, and (3) whether the use of ratings websites varied based on the surgeons' geographic region of practice.
METHODS: The USA was divided into nine geographic regions, and the most populous city in each region was selected. HealthGrades and the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery (ABOS) database were used to identify and screen (respectively) all Orthopaedic Surgeons within each of these nine cities. These surgeons were divided into three "age" groups by years since board certification (0-10, 10-20, and 20-30 years were assigned as Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively). An equal number of surgeons were randomly selected from each region for final analysis. The online profiles for each surgeon were reviewed on four online physician rating websites (PRW, i.e. HealthGrades, Vitals, RateMDs, Yelp) for the number of available patient reviews. Descriptive statistics, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Pearson correlations were used.
RESULTS: Using HealthGrades, 2802 "Orthopaedic Surgeons" were identified in nine cities. However, 1271 (45%) of these were not found in the ABOS board certification database. After randomization, a total of 351 surgeons were included in the final analysis. For these 351 surgeons, the mean number of reviews per surgeon found on all four websites was 9.0 ± 14.8 (range 0-184). The mean number of reviews did not differ between the three age groups (p > 0.05) with 8.7 ± 14.4, (2) 10.3 ± 18.3, and (3) 8.0 ± 10.8 for Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. However, the rate that reviews were obtained (i.e. reviews per surgeon per year) was significantly higher (p < 0.001) in Group 1 (2.6 ± 7.7 reviews per year) compared to Group 2 (1.4 ± 2.4) and Group 3 (1.1 ± 1.4). There was no correlation between the number of reviews and years in practice (R < 0.001), and there was a poor correlation between number of reviews and regional population (R = 0.199).
CONCLUSIONS: The number of reviews per surgeon did not differ significantly between the three defined age groups based on years in practice. However, surgeons with less than 10 years in practice were accumulating reviews at a significantly higher rate. Interestingly nearly half of "Orthopaedic Surgeons" listed were not found to be ABOS-certified Orthopaedic Surgeons.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Geographic region; Online; Orthopaedic Surgeon; Physician rating website; Years in practice

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28853024     DOI: 10.1007/s12306-017-0500-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg        ISSN: 2035-5114


  14 in total

1.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.

Authors:  David Moher; Alessandro Liberati; Jennifer Tetzlaff; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  Int J Surg       Date:  2010-02-18       Impact factor: 6.071

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

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

Review 3.  Online Patient Ratings: Why They Matter and What They Mean.

Authors:  Samir K Trehan; Aaron Daluiski
Journal:  J Hand Surg Am       Date:  2016-01-01       Impact factor: 2.230

4.  Online physician reviews: the good, the bad and the ugly.

Authors:  Chandy Ellimoottil; Stefan W Leichtle; Corey J Wright; Abdulla Fakhro; Amanda K Arrington; Thomas J Chirichella; William H Ward
Journal:  Bull Am Coll Surg       Date:  2013-09

5.  What patients say about their doctors online: a qualitative content analysis.

Authors:  Andrea López; Alissa Detz; Neda Ratanawongsa; Urmimala Sarkar
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2012-01-04       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  The availability and nature of physician information on the internet.

Authors:  Arash Mostaghimi; Bradley H Crotty; Bruce E Landon
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2010-06-11       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  Patients' evaluations of health care providers in the era of social networking: an analysis of physician-rating websites.

Authors:  Tara Lagu; Nicholas S Hannon; Michael B Rothberg; Peter K Lindenauer
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2010-05-13       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  Associations between Internet-based patient ratings and conventional surveys of patient experience in the English NHS: an observational study.

Authors:  Felix Greaves; Utz J Pape; Dominic King; Ara Darzi; Azeem Majeed; Robert M Wachter; Christopher Millett
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2012-04-20       Impact factor: 7.035

9.  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

Review 10.  Eight questions about physician-rating websites: a systematic review.

Authors:  Martin Emmert; Uwe Sander; Frank Pisch
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 5.428

View more
  6 in total

1.  A Large Number of Reviews on Physician Rating Websites May Reflect Reputation Management.

Authors:  Shyam Ramachandran; David Ring; David Langerhuizen; Gregg Vagner
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2022-06

2.  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

3.  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

4.  Patient Satisfaction of General Dermatologists: A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis of 38,008 Online Reviews by Gender and Years of Experience.

Authors:  Megan H Trager; Dawn Queen; Weijia Fan; Faramarz H Samie
Journal:  JID Innov       Date:  2021-12-10

5.  What Affects an Orthopaedic Surgeon's Online Rating? A Large-Scale, Retrospective Analysis.

Authors:  Mital D Patel; Marshall D Williams; Merritt J Thompson; Parth N Desai
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev       Date:  2022-03-15

6.  The impact of social media presence, age, and patient reported wait times on physician review websites for sports medicine surgeons.

Authors:  Andrew J Sama; David P Matichak; Nicholas C Schiller; Deborah J Li; Chester J Donnally; Dhanur Damodar; Brian J Cole
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2021-07-14
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.