Robert G Dorfman1,2, Chad Purnell1,2, Cecil Qiu1,2, Marco F Ellis1,2, C Bob Basu1,2, John Y S Kim1,2. 1. Chicago, Ill.; and Cypress, Texas. 2. From the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine; and the Division of Plastic Surgery, North Cypress Medical Center.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Online reviews have become modern versions of the word-of-mouth recommendation, and prospective patients are increasingly consulting them before making decisions about their surgical care. The authors' objectives were to (1) identify trends in the use of online reviews, and (2) important reasons for patient satisfaction and dissatisfaction with aesthetic surgery. The authors selected breast augmentation as the primary procedure of interest. METHODS: Reviews of the top 10 to 20 most reviewed plastic surgeons in each of six large metropolitan areas were obtained from Google, Yelp, and RealSelf. Reviews were assessed for predefined dimensions of satisfaction and dissatisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 1077 breast augmentation reviews were obtained. Ratings were distributed bimodally, with peaks at five stars and one star. The majority of reviews were positive (87.5 percent). Relative popularity of Google versus Yelp varied across geographic regions, and average rating varied by platform. Between 2011 and 2016, the number of online reviews for breast augmentation grew at an average rate of 42.6 percent per year. Aesthetic outcome was the most commonly cited dimension (69.8 percent of reviews), whereas cost was mentioned in only 7.8 percent of reviews. A substantial minority of negative Yelp (37 percent) and Google (9.4 percent) reviews were written by patients who did not actually undergo surgery. Free-text analysis of heterogeneous reviews (containing positive and negative attributes) classified dimensions as critical, redeemable, or protective. CONCLUSION: As the influence of online review platforms continues to grow, understanding drivers of positive and negative reviews may help surgeons improve patient satisfaction.
BACKGROUND: Online reviews have become modern versions of the word-of-mouth recommendation, and prospective patients are increasingly consulting them before making decisions about their surgical care. The authors' objectives were to (1) identify trends in the use of online reviews, and (2) important reasons for patient satisfaction and dissatisfaction with aesthetic surgery. The authors selected breast augmentation as the primary procedure of interest. METHODS: Reviews of the top 10 to 20 most reviewed plastic surgeons in each of six large metropolitan areas were obtained from Google, Yelp, and RealSelf. Reviews were assessed for predefined dimensions of satisfaction and dissatisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 1077 breast augmentation reviews were obtained. Ratings were distributed bimodally, with peaks at five stars and one star. The majority of reviews were positive (87.5 percent). Relative popularity of Google versus Yelp varied across geographic regions, and average rating varied by platform. Between 2011 and 2016, the number of online reviews for breast augmentation grew at an average rate of 42.6 percent per year. Aesthetic outcome was the most commonly cited dimension (69.8 percent of reviews), whereas cost was mentioned in only 7.8 percent of reviews. A substantial minority of negative Yelp (37 percent) and Google (9.4 percent) reviews were written by patients who did not actually undergo surgery. Free-text analysis of heterogeneous reviews (containing positive and negative attributes) classified dimensions as critical, redeemable, or protective. CONCLUSION: As the influence of online review platforms continues to grow, understanding drivers of positive and negative reviews may help surgeons improve patient satisfaction.
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
Authors: Oscar J Manrique; Samyd S Bustos; Valeria P Bustos; Andres A Mascaro; Pedro Ciudad; Antonio J Forte; Gabriel Del Corral; Esther A Kim; Howard N Langstein Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2021-03-19