分析患者对骨科医生的在线评价。
Analysis of Patients' Online Reviews of Orthopaedic Surgeons.
机构信息
From the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI (Berns and Anderson); the San Diego Spine Foundation, San Diego, CA (Dr. Reid); the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI (Dr. Alsoof, Dr. Zhang, and Dr. Daniels); and the Department of Psychiatry , Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH (Dr. Shapiro).
出版信息
J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev. 2022 Oct 18;6(10). doi: 10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-22-00074. eCollection 2022 Oct 1.
INTRODUCTION
Physician rating websites (PRWs) are an increasingly popular interface between patient and surgeon. Despite the growing popularity of PRWs, little guidance exists for orthopaedic surgeons regarding online reviews. We analyzed online ratings and comments to provide a better understanding of patients' values and expectations so that surgeons can tailor their practice accordingly to enhance their clinical care and online reputation.
METHODS
Three common PRWs (Vitals, HealthGrades, and RateMDs) were queried from January 1, 2006, to May 18, 2020. Publicly available ratings, both quantitative (1 to 5 stars) and qualitative (free text comments), were collected. Comments were qualitatively tabulated as having positive or negative assessments for categories including outcome, personality, staff, surgical skill, visit time, bedside manner, wait time, diagnosis, knowledge, treatment, and advanced practice providers and analyzed using chi square goodness of fit. Quantitative comparisons of star ratings were made across surgeon years in practice, sex, practice setting, and PRW and compared using chi square independence testing.
RESULTS
In total, 81% of patient comments were found to have a positive assessment. Comments regarding outcome (P < 0.001), staff (P = 0.001), surgical skill (P < 0.001), or knowledge (P = 0.001) were more likely to be positive. Reviews regarding bedside manner (P < 0.001), wait time (P < 0.001), diagnosis (P < 0.001), treatment (P < 0.001), or advanced practice providers (P < 0.001) were more likely to be negative. Surgeon sex was not associated with a difference in quantitative ratings (P = 0.131), unlike practice setting (P < 0.001) and PRW (P < 0.001).
DISCUSSION
PRWs are a growing interface between surgeon and patient with a considerable effect on surgeon marketability. This study reveals a statistical association between certain patient-centered medical practices and positive patient reviews. This emphasizes the importance of ensuring that high standards are maintained throughout a physician's practice of maintaining a constant awareness of the fundamentals for effective patient care and of taking care to curate a physician's online presence.
简介
医生评级网站（PRW）是患者与外科医生之间日益流行的界面。尽管 PRW 越来越受欢迎，但对于整形外科医生来说，关于在线评论的指导很少。我们分析了在线评级和评论，以更好地了解患者的价值观和期望，以便外科医生可以相应地调整他们的实践，以提高他们的临床护理和在线声誉。
方法
从 2006 年 1 月 1 日至 2020 年 5 月 18 日，查询了三个常见的 PRW（Vitals、HealthGrades 和 RateMDs）。收集了公开的评级，包括定量（1 到 5 星）和定性（免费文本评论）。评论被定性地分为对包括结果、个性、工作人员、手术技能、就诊时间、态度、等待时间、诊断、知识、治疗以及高级实践提供者等类别的积极或消极评估，并使用卡方拟合优度进行分析。使用卡方独立性检验比较了不同外科医生实践年限、性别、实践环境和 PRW 之间的星级评分的定量比较。
结果
总共 81%的患者评论被发现是积极的评估。关于结果（P < 0.001）、工作人员（P = 0.001）、手术技能（P < 0.001）或知识（P = 0.001）的评论更有可能是积极的。关于态度（P < 0.001）、等待时间（P < 0.001）、诊断（P < 0.001）、治疗（P < 0.001）或高级实践提供者（P < 0.001）的评论更有可能是负面的。外科医生的性别与定量评分的差异无关（P = 0.131），而实践环境（P < 0.001）和 PRW（P < 0.001）则不然。
讨论
PRW 是外科医生和患者之间日益增长的界面，对外科医生的市场销售能力有相当大的影响。本研究揭示了某些以患者为中心的医疗实践与积极的患者评价之间存在统计学关联。这强调了确保在医生的整个实践过程中保持高标准的重要性，同时要始终保持对有效患者护理基本要素的认识，并要注意管理医生的在线形象。
Zotero 插件