How do physician demographics, training, social media usage, online presence, and wait times influence online physician review scores for spine surgeons?

Abstract

<jats:sec><jats:title>OBJECTIVE</jats:title><jats:p>The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of certain demographics, social media usage, and physician review website variables for spine surgeons across <jats:ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://Healthgrades.com">Healthgrades.com</jats:ext-link> (Healthgrades), <jats:ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://Vitals.com">Vitals.com</jats:ext-link> (Vitals), and <jats:ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://Google.com">Google.com</jats:ext-link> (Google).</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>METHODS</jats:title><jats:p>Through a directory of registered North American Spine Society (NASS) physicians, we identified spine surgeons practicing in Texas (107 neurosurgery trained, 192 orthopedic trained). Three physician rating websites (Healthgrades, Vitals, Google) were accessed to obtain surgeon demographics, training history, practice setting, number of ratings/reviews, and overall score (January 2, 2018–January 16, 2018). Using only the first 10 search results from <jats:ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://Google.com">Google.com</jats:ext-link>, we then identified whether the surgeon had a website presence or an accessible social media account on Facebook, Twitter, and/or Instagram.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>RESULTS</jats:title><jats:p>Physicians with either a personal or institutional website had a higher overall rating on Healthgrades compared to those who did not have a website (p &lt; 0.01). Nearly all spine surgeons had a personal or institutional website (90.3%), and at least 1 accessible social media account was recorded for 43.5% of the spine surgeons in our study cohort (39.5% Facebook, 10.4% Twitter, 2.7% Instagram). Social media presence was not significantly associated with overall ratings across all 3 sites, but it did significantly correlate with more comments on Healthgrades. In multivariable analysis, increasing surgeon age was significantly associated with a lower overall rating across all 3 review sites (p &lt; 0.05). Neurosurgeons had higher overall ratings on Vitals (p = 0.04). Longer wait times were significantly associated with a lower overall rating on Healthgrades (p &lt; 0.0001). Overall ratings from all 3 websites correlated significantly with each other, indicating agreement between physician ratings across different platforms.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>CONCLUSIONS</jats:title><jats:p>Longer wait times, increasing physician age, and the absence of a website are indicative of lower online review scores for spine surgeons. Neurosurgery training correlated with a higher overall review score on Vitals. Having an accessible social media account does not appear to influence scores, but it is correlated with increased patient feedback on Healthgrades. Identification of ways to optimize patients’ perception of care are important in the future of performance-based medicine.</jats:p></jats:sec>

The impact of social media presence, age, and patient reported wait times on physician review websites for sports medicine surgeons

“…These findings expand upon previous studies which demonstrate the power of SM to influence PRWs among spine and joint replacement surgeons. 13,15,16,21 These results present SM as a tool for physicians to help shape his/her online image, which may prove to be an influential factor in the acquisition of new patients. The potential influence of the online physician review was demonstrated in a study which examined the effects of a single positive review posted to a social media website, on a clinic's cosmetic surgery volume.…”

“…A previous study examined online reviews among spinal surgeons and revealed similar results, where the level of training correlated with differences in PRW ratings, with neurosurgery trained physicians receiving higher grades when compared to those who were orthopaedic trained. 13 The three PRWs investigated were positively correlated with one another. The weak to moderate Pearson correlation observed between them indicates that the ratings for a physician on one website do not necessarily correlate strongly to their rating on another rating website.…”

“…We also found that older physician age was correlated with lower ratings on HG, supporting previous studies among spine surgeons. 13 Sports medicine surgeons who graduated residency before the year 2000 had more ratings on Vitals.com and more comments on Google.com. It is likely that these findings are a consequence of increased length of time in practice, and subsequently, more time to accumulate patient input, as the overall ratings were not higher for this cohort.…”

“…8,11,12 It has also been demonstrated that older age and the absence of a website correlate with lower online ratings. 13 As a result, research has been directed towards the effects of social media (SM), and its nearly 3 billion users, on PRW ratings. 14 Recent studies have shown that a SM presence was correlated with more comments and ratings on PRWs and that accessible SM accounts are associated with higher ratings on PRWs.…”

How wait-times, social media, and surgeon demographics influence online reviews on leading review websites for joint replacement surgeons

“…The impact of SM with online reviews has been studied in the past year within spine surgery, 6 but there have not been any published studies that analyzed the impact of SM in joint reconstruction. With about 65% of older adults now using SM, 7 a SM presence and online physician ratings are more important than ever for the success of orthopedic surgeons.…”