Predictive factors of positive online patient ratings of spine surgeons.
Online patient ratings
Patient satisfaction
Physician performance
Physician review websites
Social media
Spine surgeon ratings
trustworthiness
Journal
The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society
ISSN: 1878-1632
Titre abrégé: Spine J
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101130732
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2019
01 2019
Historique:
received:
31
01
2018
revised:
27
07
2018
accepted:
27
07
2018
pubmed:
5
8
2018
medline:
4
1
2020
entrez:
5
8
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Online physician rating websites are increasingly used by patients to evaluate their doctors. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate factors associated with better spine surgeon ratings. Orthopedic spine surgeons were randomly selected from the North American Spine Society directory utilizing a random number generator. Surgeon profiles on three physician rating websites, namely, www.HealthGrades.com, www.Vitals.com, and www.RateMDs.com, were analyzed to gather qualitative and quantitative data on patients' perceptions of the surgeons. Independent variables from the websites were analyzed in relation to overall physician or patient satisfaction rating. Comments were coded by subject into following three categories: professional competence, bedside manner, and practice characteristics. A total of 250 surgeons were evaluated, and 92% (n=230) of these doctors had at least one rating among the three websites. The surgeons with a higher average rating had significantly better trust (p<.01), scheduling (p<.01), staff (p<.01), helpfulness (p<.01), and punctuality (p<.01) scores but significantly less experience (p<.05). A linear regression model for the average rating of each surgeon (R This investigation assessed spine surgeon online patient ratings and categorized factors that patients associate with quality care. Trustworthiness was the most significant predictor of positive ratings, whereas ease of scheduling, quality of staff, helpfulness, and punctuality were also associated with higher patient ratings. Understanding what patients value may help optimize care of spine surgery patients.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Online physician rating websites are increasingly used by patients to evaluate their doctors. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate factors associated with better spine surgeon ratings.
METHODS
Orthopedic spine surgeons were randomly selected from the North American Spine Society directory utilizing a random number generator. Surgeon profiles on three physician rating websites, namely, www.HealthGrades.com, www.Vitals.com, and www.RateMDs.com, were analyzed to gather qualitative and quantitative data on patients' perceptions of the surgeons. Independent variables from the websites were analyzed in relation to overall physician or patient satisfaction rating. Comments were coded by subject into following three categories: professional competence, bedside manner, and practice characteristics.
RESULTS
A total of 250 surgeons were evaluated, and 92% (n=230) of these doctors had at least one rating among the three websites. The surgeons with a higher average rating had significantly better trust (p<.01), scheduling (p<.01), staff (p<.01), helpfulness (p<.01), and punctuality (p<.01) scores but significantly less experience (p<.05). A linear regression model for the average rating of each surgeon (R
CONCLUSIONS
This investigation assessed spine surgeon online patient ratings and categorized factors that patients associate with quality care. Trustworthiness was the most significant predictor of positive ratings, whereas ease of scheduling, quality of staff, helpfulness, and punctuality were also associated with higher patient ratings. Understanding what patients value may help optimize care of spine surgery patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30077043
pii: S1529-9430(18)31083-0
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2018.07.024
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
182-185Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.