Online Patient Ratings Are Not Correlated with Total Knee Replacement Surgeon–Specific Outcomes

Trehan, Samir K.; Nguyen, Joseph; Marx, Robert G.; Cross, Michael B.; Pan, Ting; Daluiski, Aaron; Lyman, Stephen

doi:10.1007/s11420-017-9600-6

Cited by 36 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Table 2 also includes the summaries of the relationship between PORs and clinical outcomes and other quality measures. Most of the 9 studies on the relationships of PORs and clinical outcomes reported weak or no relationship [11,31,33,52,53,56,66,68,69]. For instance, a study of PORs on cardiologists found no correlation (Spearman ρ=−0.06; P =.13) between PORs and mortality rates following the coronary artery bypass surgery [56].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Do Patients Say About Doctors Online? A Systematic Review of Studies on Patient Online Reviews

Hong¹,

Liang²,

Radcliff³

et al. 2019

J Med Internet Res

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The number of patient online reviews (PORs) has grown significantly, and PORs have played an increasingly important role in patients’ choice of health care providers. Objective The objective of our study was to systematically review studies on PORs, summarize the major findings and study characteristics, identify literature gaps, and make recommendations for future research. Methods A major database search was completed in January 2019. Studies were included if they (1) focused on PORs of physicians and hospitals, (2) reported qualitative or quantitative results from analysis of PORs, and (3) peer-reviewed empirical studies. Study characteristics and major findings were synthesized using predesigned tables. Results A total of 63 studies (69 articles) that met the above criteria were included in the review. Most studies (n=48) were conducted in the United States, including Puerto Rico, and the remaining were from Europe, Australia, and China. Earlier studies (published before 2010) used content analysis with small sample sizes; more recent studies retrieved and analyzed larger datasets using machine learning technologies. The number of PORs ranged from fewer than 200 to over 700,000. About 90% of the studies were focused on clinicians, typically specialists such as surgeons; 27% covered health care organizations, typically hospitals; and some studied both. A majority of PORs were positive and patients’ comments on their providers were favorable. Although most studies were descriptive, some compared PORs with traditional surveys of patient experience and found a high degree of correlation and some compared PORs with clinical outcomes but found a low level of correlation. Conclusions PORs contain valuable information that can generate insights into quality of care and patient-provider relationship, but it has not been systematically used for studies of health care quality. With the advancement of machine learning and data analysis tools, we anticipate more research on PORs based on testable hypotheses and rigorous analytic methods. Trial Registration International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42018085057; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=85057 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/76ddvTZ1C)

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Do Patients Say About Doctors Online? A Systematic Review of Studies on Patient Online Reviews

Hong¹,

Liang²,

Radcliff³

et al. 2019

J Med Internet Res

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some studies argue that patients are not well-suited to evaluate physician quality because of the information asymmetry between patients and care providers [ 69 ]. In addition, several studies emphasize that ratings and reviews of patients are not correlated to clinical measures of physician quality [ 70 , 71 ]. Despite these shortcomings, PRWs have surged in popularity and have become instrumental in shaping prospective patients’ opinions.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Data Quality Issues With Physician-Rating Websites: Systematic Review

Mulgund¹,

Sharman²,

Anand³

et al. 2020

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In recent years, online physician-rating websites have become prominent and exert considerable influence on patients’ decisions. However, the quality of these decisions depends on the quality of data that these systems collect. Thus, there is a need to examine the various data quality issues with physician-rating websites. Objective This study’s objective was to identify and categorize the data quality issues afflicting physician-rating websites by reviewing the literature on online patient-reported physician ratings and reviews. Methods We performed a systematic literature search in ACM Digital Library, EBSCO, Springer, PubMed, and Google Scholar. The search was limited to quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method papers published in the English language from 2001 to 2020. Results A total of 423 articles were screened. From these, 49 papers describing 18 unique data quality issues afflicting physician-rating websites were included. Using a data quality framework, we classified these issues into the following four categories: intrinsic, contextual, representational, and accessible. Among the papers, 53% (26/49) reported intrinsic data quality errors, 61% (30/49) highlighted contextual data quality issues, 8% (4/49) discussed representational data quality issues, and 27% (13/49) emphasized accessibility data quality. More than half the papers discussed multiple categories of data quality issues. Conclusions The results from this review demonstrate the presence of a range of data quality issues. While intrinsic and contextual factors have been well-researched, accessibility and representational issues warrant more attention from researchers, as well as practitioners. In particular, representational factors, such as the impact of inline advertisements and the positioning of positive reviews on the first few pages, are usually deliberate and result from the business model of physician-rating websites. The impact of these factors on data quality has not been addressed adequately and requires further investigation.

show abstract

“…Some of these investigated outcomes include infection rate, re-admission rate, revisional surgery rate, and risk-adjusted mortality rate, in surgeries such as total knee replacements, hernia repairs, and coronary artery bypass grafting. All of these studies failed to find any correlation between a surgeon's online ratings and their measurable outcomes, including those listed above [16][17][18]. These results seriously undermine the utility of such websites, however are unlikely to be realized by the average health care consumer.…”

Section: Online Era: Social Media and Patient Influencementioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic Mutation Carriers: Special Considerations for Their Influence on a Modern Breast Reconstruction Practice

Woodfin¹,

Antony²

2020

Breast Cancer and Breast Reconstruction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With medical advancement, increasing numbers of genetic variations and mutations are being uncovered that offer greater insight into which patients have a predisposition for the development of breast cancer. Reasonable management for these patients includes high-risk surveillance, medical prophylaxis, or bilateral prophylactic mastectomy with immediate reconstruction which is becoming increasingly popular. However, this cohort of patients differs from the average breast cancer patient in that they are typically younger and may have distinct reconstructive objectives for their outcomes. This chapter considers this unique and expanding population, as well as their expectations for surgical outcomes both aesthetically and oncologically. We will discuss the evolving role of social media in this population, with patient to patient virtual information sharing and how this may impact patient referrals in a manner diverging from traditional hospital-based patterns. Furthermore, we discuss how practices in which cutting-edge and novel surgical treatments are available, such as pre-pectoral and single stage reconstruction, and that incorporate team collaboration with the surgical oncologist to deliver aesthetically pleasing results with nipple sparing mastectomy and concealed scars may ultimately be attractive to genetic mutation carriers concerned not only with risk reduction but also post-operative aesthetics.

show abstract

Online Patient Ratings Are Not Correlated with Total Knee Replacement Surgeon–Specific Outcomes

Abstract: There was no correlation between surgeon-specific TKR outcome measures and online patient ratings. We therefore advise that patients exert caution when interpreting ratings on these websites.

Cited by 36 publications

References 12 publications

What Do Patients Say About Doctors Online? A Systematic Review of Studies on Patient Online Reviews

What Do Patients Say About Doctors Online? A Systematic Review of Studies on Patient Online Reviews

Data Quality Issues With Physician-Rating Websites: Systematic Review

Genetic Mutation Carriers: Special Considerations for Their Influence on a Modern Breast Reconstruction Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About