Reporting of Patient Experience Data on Health Systems’ Websites and Commercial Physician-Rating Websites: Mixed-Methods Analysis

Lagu, Tara; Norton, Caroline M.; Russo, Lindsey M.; Priya, Aruna; Goff, Sarah L.; Lindenauer, Peter K.

doi:10.2196/12007

Cited by 20 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Lagu et al [14] found that 88% of ratings were positive for both generalists and specialists (as defined by a rating of 3 or greater on a 4-point scale). A prior study also demonstrated that most comments on PRWs are positive [15]. Generally, our findings are consistent with these prior investigations suggesting that most ratings are either excellent or poor [16].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Indeed, social media presence, such as Facebook followers, has been shown to correlate with US News and World Report reputation score [29]. Finally, utilizing noncommercial PRWs can also be valuable because the percentage of positive comments has been shown to be higher on health systems’ online review websites when compared to commercial PRWs [15].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Online Ratings of Urologists: Comprehensive Analysis

Cw¹,

Zillioux²,

Rapp³

2019

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Physician-rating websites are being increasingly used by patients to help guide physician choice. As such, an understanding of these websites and factors that influence ratings is valuable to physicians. Objective We sought to perform a comprehensive analysis of online urology ratings information, with a specific focus on the relationship between number of ratings or comments and overall physician rating. Methods We analyzed urologist ratings on the Healthgrades website. The data retrieval focused on physician and staff ratings information. Our analysis included descriptive statistics of physician and staff ratings and correlation analysis between physician or staff performance and overall physician rating. Finally, we performed a best-fit analysis to assess for an association between number of physician ratings and overall rating. Results From a total of 9921 urology profiles analyzed, there were 99,959 ratings and 23,492 comments. Most ratings were either 5 (“excellent”) (67.53%, 67,505/99,959) or 1 (“poor”) (24.22%, 24,218/99,959). All physician and staff performance ratings demonstrated a positive and statistically significant correlation with overall physician rating ( P <.001 for all analyses). Best-fit analysis demonstrated a negative relationship between number of ratings or comments and overall rating until physicians achieved 21 ratings or 6 comments. Thereafter, a positive relationship was seen. Conclusions In our study, a dichotomous rating distribution was seen with more than 90% of ratings being either excellent or poor. A negative relationship between number of ratings or comments and overall rating was initially seen, after which a positive relationship was demonstrated. Combined, these data suggest that physicians can benefit from understanding online ratings and that proactive steps to encourage patient rating submissions may help optimize overall rating.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Online Ratings of Urologists: Comprehensive Analysis

Cw¹,

Zillioux²,

Rapp³

2019

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Patients' and their families' needs, values, and inputs influence care decisions [1]. Patients are researching treatments on the internet and engaging as advocates and even as partners with physicians both on the internet and in person [1][2][3][4][5]. A crucial aspect of patient experience is the patient-clinician engagement or using a relationship-centered care approach.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient Experience in Virtual Visits Hinges on Technology and the Patient-Clinician Relationship: A Large Survey Study With Open-ended Questions

Rose¹,

Hurwitz²,

Mercer³

et al. 2021

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Patient satisfaction with in-person medical visits includes patient-clinician engagement. However, communication, empathy, and other relationship-centered care measures in virtual visits have not been adequately investigated. Objective This study aims to comprehensively consider patient experience, including relationship-centered care measures, to assess patient satisfaction during virtual visits. Methods We conducted a large survey study with open-ended questions to comprehensively assess patients’ experiences with virtual visits in a diverse patient population. Adults with a virtual visit between June 21, 2017, and July 12, 2017, were invited to complete a survey of 21 Likert-scale items and textboxes for comments following their visit. Factor analysis of the survey items revealed three factors: experience with technology, patient-clinician engagement, and overall satisfaction. Multivariable logistic regression was used to test the associations among the three factors and patient demographics, clinician type, and prior relationship with the clinician. Using qualitative framework analysis, we identified recurrent themes in survey comments, quantitatively coded comments, and computed descriptive statistics of the coded comments. Results A total of 65.7% (426/648) of the patients completed the survey; 64.1% (273/426) of the respondents were women, and the average age was 46 (range 18-86) years. The sample was geographically diverse: 70.2% (299/426) from Ohio, 6.8% (29/426) from Florida, 4.2% (18/426) from Pennsylvania, and 18.7% (80/426) from other states. With regard to insurance coverage, 57.5% (245/426) were undetermined, 23.7% (101/426) had the hospital’s employee health insurance, and 18.7% (80/426) had other private insurance. Types of virtual visits and clinicians varied. Overall, 58.4% (249/426) of patients had an on-demand visit, whereas 41.5% (177/426) had a scheduled visit. A total of 41.8% (178/426) of patients had a virtual visit with a family physician, 20.9% (89/426) with an advanced practice provider, and the rest had a visit with a specialist. Most patients (393/423, 92.9%) agreed that their virtual visit clinician was interested in them as a person, and their virtual visit made it easy to get the care they needed (383/421, 90.9%). A total of 81.9% (344/420) of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that their virtual visit was as good as an in-person visit by a clinician. Having a prior relationship with their virtual visit clinician was associated with less comfort and ease with virtual technology among patients (odds ratio 0.58, 95% CI 0.35-0.98). In terms of technology, patients found the interface easy to use (392/423, 92.7%) and felt comfortable using it (401/423, 94.8%). Technical difficulties were associated with lower odds of overall satisfaction (odds ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.28-0.76). Conclusions Patient-clinician engagement in virtual visits was comparable with in-person visits. This study supports the value and acceptance of virtual visits. Evaluations of virtual visits should include assessments of technology and patient-clinician engagement, as both are likely to influence patient satisfaction.

show abstract

“…This may suggest growing frustration with online reporting of quality and experience data because of the rapidly changing landscape, with recent increases in the presence of patientgenerated reviews 8,11 and the emergence of a new phenomenon in which hospitals and health systems have begun to publish physician-specific patient experience data and patient comments on their websites, for example. 25 However, this finding may also merely reflect that this sample is different than previously surveyed populations. Physicians' skepticism towards commercial physician rating sites has also been previously reported.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 75%

Physician Beliefs About Online Reporting of Quality and Experience Data

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IMPORTANCE: Physician attitudes about websites that publicly report health care quality and experience data have not been recently described. OBJECTIVES: To examine physician attitudes about the accuracy of websites that report information about quality of care and patient experience and to describe physician beliefs about the helpfulness of these data for patients choosing a physician. DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS, AND MEASURES: The Rhode Island Department of Health (RIDOH) and a multistakeholder group developed and piloted two questions that were added to RIDOH's biennial physician survey of all 4197 practicing physicians in Rhode Island: (1) "How accurate of a picture do you feel that the following types of online resources give about the quality of care that physicians provide?" (with choices) and (2) "Which types of physician-specific information (i.e., not about the practice overall) would be helpful to include in online resources for patients to help them choose a new physician? (Select all that apply)." Responses were stratified by primary care vs. subspecialty clinicians. Summary statistics and chisquared tests were used to analyze the results. RESULTS: Among 1792 respondents (response rate 43%), 45% were unaware of RIDOH's site and 54% were unaware of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)' quality reporting sites. Only 2% felt that Medicare sites were "very accurate" in depicting physician quality. Most physicians supported public reporting of general information about physicians (e.g., board certification), but just over one-third of physicians felt that performance-based quality measures are "helpful" (and a similar percentage reported that patient reviews felt are "helpful") for patients choosing a physician. CONCLUSIONS: Physician-respondents were either uninformed or skeptical about public reporting websites. In contrast to prior reports that a majority of patients value some forms of publicly reported data, most physicians do not consider quality metrics and patient-generated reviews helpful for patients who are choosing a physician.

show abstract

Reporting of Patient Experience Data on Health Systems’ Websites and Commercial Physician-Rating Websites: Mixed-Methods Analysis

Cited by 20 publications

References 24 publications

Online Ratings of Urologists: Comprehensive Analysis

Online Ratings of Urologists: Comprehensive Analysis

Patient Experience in Virtual Visits Hinges on Technology and the Patient-Clinician Relationship: A Large Survey Study With Open-ended Questions

Physician Beliefs About Online Reporting of Quality and Experience Data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About