Characterizing negative reviews of orthopedic spine surgeons and practices

Brinkman, Joseph C.; Pollock, Jordan R.; Arthur, Jaymeson R.; Smith, Jacob; Lin, Keldon K.; Chang, Michael S.

doi:10.1016/j.xnsj.2022.100126

Cited by 4 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding is especially important in the context of a small body of work within spine surgery, and a larger body of work more broadly within orthopedic surgery repeatedly listing poor bedside manner as a crucial aspect determining the generation of a negative online review. 13,[22][23][24][25][26] This general finding may be relatively concentrated in the South.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…6,9,10 Despite the growing popularity and impact of patient review websites, only a small number of studies have analyzed spine surgeon reviews. [11][12][13] Of these, only one study has characterized negative (1-star) reviews, which analyzed reviews from Yelp.com and a few metropolitan areas. 13 The purpose of this study was to evaluate and categorize negative reviews of spine surgeons in the United States, with a focus on surgical versus nonsurgical reviewers.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[11][12][13] Of these, only one study has characterized negative (1-star) reviews, which analyzed reviews from Yelp.com and a few metropolitan areas. 13 The purpose of this study was to evaluate and categorize negative reviews of spine surgeons in the United States, with a focus on surgical versus nonsurgical reviewers. The hypothesis was that extremely negative (1-star) reviews of spine surgeons will primarily consist of nonsurgical patients who believe that their ultimate plan of care was incongruent with their expectations.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Characterizing Negative Online Reviews of Spine Surgeons

Artz,

Dalton,

Ramanathan

et al. 2024

Spine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Design. Retrospective review Objective. Characterize negative reviews of spine surgeons in the United States Summary. Physician rating websites significantly influence the selection of doctors by other patients. Negative experiences are impacted by various factors, both clinical and nonclinical, geography, and practice structure. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and categorize negative reviews of spine surgeons in the United States, with a focus on surgical versus nonsurgical reviewers. Methods. Spine surgeons were selected from available online professional society membership directories. A search for reviews was performed on Healthgrades.com, Vitals.com, and RateMDs.com for the past 10 years. Free response reviews were coded by complaint and qualitative analysis was performed. Chi-square and Fisher exact tests were used to compare categorical variables, and multiple comparisons were adjusted with Benjamini-Hochberg correction. A binary logistic regression model was performed for the top three most mentioned nonclinical and clinical complaint labels. A P-value<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results. A total of 16,695 online reviews were evaluated, including 1690 one-star reviews (10.1%). Amongst one-star reviews, 64.7% were written by nonsurgical patients and 35.3% by surgical patients. Nonclinical and clinical comments constituted 54.9% and 45.1% of reviews, respectively Surgeons in the South had more “bedside manner” comments (43.3%, P<0.0001), while Northeast surgeons had more “poor surgical outcome” remarks compared to all other geographic regions (14.4%, P<0.001). Practicing in the South and Northeast were independent predictors of having complaints about “bedside manner” and “poor surgical outcome”, respectively. Conclusion. Most one-star reviews of spine surgeons were attributed to nonsurgical patients, who tended to be unsatisfied with nonclinical factors, especially “bedside manner”. However, there was substantial geographic variation. These results suggest that spine surgeons could benefit from focusing on nonclinical factors (bedside manner), especially amongst nonoperative patients, and that regional nuances should be considered in delivering spine care. Level of Evidence. Level 5

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Characterizing Negative Online Reviews of Spine Surgeons

Artz,

Dalton,

Ramanathan

et al. 2024

Spine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These unexpected bills are a common complaint among patients according to various studies analyzing common complaints in various healthcare settings. [4][5][6][7] Price transparency for medical services in the United States has been a concern for decades. 8 However, as negotiations between insurers and healthcare systems are often kept private, it may be difficult to accurately inform patients regarding accurate medical procedure pricing.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Large Variation in Listed Chargemaster Price for Total Joint Arthroplasty Among Top Orthopaedic Hospitals in the United States

Pollock,

Doan,

Moore

et al. 2023

JAAOS Glob Res Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Chargemasters are lists of all services offered by a hospital and their associated cost. This study analyzes chargemaster data to determine price differences among different hospitals for total joint arthroplasty. Methods: In May 2020, the chargemaster data for highly rated orthopaedic hospitals were accessed, and the diagnostic-related group (DRG) codes related to primary and revision total joint arthroplasty were analyzed (DRGs 466, 467, 468, 469, and 470). The prices listed for each hospital were averaged, and descriptive statistics were calculated. Furthermore, Medicare reimbursement was collected. A subanalysis was performed to determine relationships between geographic and demographic information. Results: The median price for a major hip or knee joint arthroplasty without complications was $68,016 (range: $39,927 to $195,264). The median price of a revision of hip or knee arthroplasty without complications was $90,966 (range: $58,967 to $247,715). The cost of living in the city in which the hospitals are located was weakly correlated with procedure pricing, whereas the median income had no notable relationship to chargemaster pricing. Conclusion: The published cost of DRG codes in arthroplasty is widely variable among the top 20 US orthopaedic hospitals, with little correlation to the cost of living or median income of the area.

show abstract

“…Brinkman et al. [1] identified and characterized negative Yelp.com reviews of orthopedic spine surgeons and practices in eight major US metropolitan areas. This is a timely and important topic, as reviews such as these continue to increase in number and may play a significant role in how patients choose their physicians.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%