Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2021 Dec;130(12):1317-1325. doi: 10.1177/00034894211005985. Epub 2021 Apr 3.
This study compares hospital-generated online ratings to patient-generated online ratings in academic otolaryngology and evaluates physician factors influencing these results.
Websites of academic otolaryngologists were assessed for inclusion of hospital-generated Press Ganey surveys. Corresponding scores on Healthgrades and Vitals.com were identified via internet search. Hospital ratings were compared with patient-generated ratings, including score, demographics, and number of ratings. All data was collected between July 15th 2019 and August 22nd 2019.
742 academic otolaryngologists with hospital-generated ratings were identified. Mean hospital-generated rating was significantly higher ((4.70, 95% CI 4.69-4.72) than patient-generated rating (Vitals:4.26, 95% CI 4.18-4.34, and Healthgrades:4.02, 95% CI 3.87-4.18; < .001). In patient-generated rating, an increased number of rating scores (>20) was associated with male gender, professor ranking, and >30 years in practice ( < .005). Physician demographics did not impact number of ratings in hospital-generated setting. With patient-generated, lower aggregate score was associated with professor ranking ( = .001). In hospital-generated, lower score was associated with >30+ years in practice ( = .023). Across all platforms, comprehensive otolaryngologists and neurotologists/otologists were rated lower in comparison to other specialties (PGS: < .001,Vitals: = .027,Healthgrades: = .016).
Hospital-generated ratings yield higher mean scores than patient-generated platforms. Between sources, Healthgrades.com scores were lower than those of Vitals.com. Professors with >30 years of practice generated more reviews in patient-generated ratings, and these physicians were generally rated lower. Access to patient-generated ratings is universal and physicians should be aware of variability between online rating platforms as scores may affect referrals and practice patterns.
本研究比较了学术耳鼻喉科中医院生成的在线评分和患者生成的在线评分,并评估了影响这些结果的医生因素。
评估学术耳鼻喉科医生的网站,以确定是否包含医院生成的 Press Ganey 调查。通过互联网搜索确定 Healthgrades 和 Vitals.com 上的相应评分。比较医院评分和患者生成的评分,包括评分、人口统计学特征和评分数量。所有数据均于 2019 年 7 月 15 日至 2019 年 8 月 22 日收集。
确定了 742 名具有医院生成评分的学术耳鼻喉科医生。医院生成的平均评分明显高于患者生成的评分(Vitals:4.26,95%CI 4.18-4.34,Healthgrades:4.02,95%CI 3.87-4.18;<0.001)。在患者生成的评分中,评分数量增加(>20)与男性性别、教授排名和 30 年以上的实践经验相关(<0.005)。医生人口统计学特征不会影响医院生成环境中的评分数量。在患者生成的评分中,综合耳鼻喉科医生和神经耳科/耳鼻喉科医生的评分较低(PGS:<0.001,Vitals:=0.027,Healthgrades:=0.016)。
医院生成的评分比患者生成的平台产生更高的平均分数。在不同来源之间,Healthgrades.com 的评分低于 Vitals.com。在患者生成的评分中,具有 30 年以上实践经验的教授获得了更多的评论,而这些医生的评分普遍较低。患者生成的评分是普遍可用的,医生应该意识到在线评分平台之间的差异,因为评分可能会影响转诊和实践模式。