Chen Jennwood, Presson Angela, Zhang Chong, Ray David, Finlayson Samuel, Glasgow Robert
Department of General Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Department of Study Design & Biostatistics Center, University of Utah Health Sciences Center for Clinical & Translational Science, Salt Lake City, Utah.
J Surg Res. 2018 Jul;227:1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2018.01.037. Epub 2018 Feb 28.
Physician review websites such as Vitals and Healthgrades are becoming an increasingly popular tool for patients to choose providers. We hypothesized that the scores of these surveys poorly represent the true value of patient satisfaction when compared to a validated survey instrument.
Answers from Vitals and Healthgrades online surveys were compared to the Press Ganey Medical Practice Survey (PGMPS) for 200 faculty members at a university hospital for FY15. Weighted Pearson's correlation was used to compare Healthgrades and Vitals to PGMPS.
While statistically significant, both Vitals and Healthgrades had very low correlations with the PGMPS with weighted coefficients of 0.18 (95% confidence interval: 0.02-0.34, P = 0.025) and 0.27 (95% confidence interval: 0.12-0.42, P < 0.001), respectively.
Online physician rating websites such as Vitals and Healthgrades poorly correlate with the PGMPS, a validated measure of patient satisfaction. Patients should be aware of these limitations and, consequently, should have access to the most accurate measure of patient satisfaction.
诸如Vitals和Healthgrades等医生评价网站正日益成为患者选择医疗服务提供者的热门工具。我们推测，与经过验证的调查工具相比，这些调查的分数很难代表患者满意度的真实价值。
将Vitals和Healthgrades在线调查的答案与一所大学医院2015财年200名教职员工的Press Ganey医疗实践调查（PGMPS）进行比较。使用加权皮尔逊相关性来比较Healthgrades和Vitals与PGMPS的关系。
虽然具有统计学意义，但Vitals和Healthgrades与PGMPS的相关性都非常低，加权系数分别为0.18（95%置信区间：0.02 - 0.34，P = 0.025）和0.27（95%置信区间：0.12 - 0.42，P < 0.001）。
诸如Vitals和Healthgrades等在线医生评分网站与PGMPS（一种经过验证的患者满意度衡量标准）的相关性很差。患者应该意识到这些局限性，因此，应该能够获得最准确的患者满意度衡量标准。
