What Do Patients Think About Their Radiation Oncologists? An Assessment of Online Patient Reviews on Healthgrades

Abstract

IntroductionAn increasing number of patients search for their physicians online. Many hospital systems utilize Press-Ganey studies as internal tools to analyze patient satisfaction, but independent third-party websites have a large presence online. Patients’ trust in these third-party sites may occur despite a low number of reviews and a lack of validity of patients’ entries. Healthgrades.com has been shown as the most popular site to appear on Google searches for radiation oncologists (ROs) in the United States (US). The aim of this study was to analyze patient satisfaction scores and the factors that influence those scores for American ROs on Healthgrades.MethodsThe physician ratings website Healthgrades was manually queried to obtain reviews from all Medicare-participating ROs with reviews (n=2,679). Patient Review Satisfaction Scores (PRSS) were recorded in response to a variety of questions. All information in the survey was scored from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent) for the following characteristics: likelihood to recommend (LTR), office environment, ease of scheduling, trust in the physician’s decision, staff friendliness, ability of the physician to listen and answer questions, ability of the physician to explain the condition, and whether the physician spent sufficient time with the patients. Associations amongst these factors were considered by computing Spearman correlation coefficients and utilizing Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests.ResultsThe ROs’ mean LTR score was 4.51±0.9 (median 5.0, 66% received the highest possible score of 5; 95% received a score>2). Patient reviews per RO ranged from 1 to 242 (4.50±0.9, median 2.0). LTR scores correlated very strongly with physician-related factors, ranging from r=0.85 (with appropriate time spent with patients) to r=0.89 (with level of trust in physician). LTR scores were not statistically significantly associated with gender, wait time, ROs’ years since graduation, academic status, or geographic region.ConclusionSatisfaction scores for ROs on a leading physician ratings website are very strong, and most patients leaving reviews are likely to recommend their own ROs to their friends and family. Understanding online ratings and identifying factors associated with positive ratings are important for both patients and ROs due to the recent growth in physician-rating third-party sites. ROs should have increased awareness regarding sites like Healthgrades and their online reputation.

How Do Patients Rate Their Radiation Oncologists in the Modern Era: An Analysis of Vitals.com

“…In our study, the OR of ROs showed the greatest correlation withbedside manner, accuracy of diagnosis, and spends appropriate time with patients, achieving strong levels of correlation with all three factors (Table 2 ). Our work aligns with previous findings that suggest that physician-related factors show the most direct relationship with the OR of ROs and oncologists [ 6 , 15 - 16 ].…”

“…In our study, we manually searched for self-reported patient data from a popular PRW and observed the majority of patient satisfaction scores for ROs to be in the range of great to excellent. These findings are consistent with our previous work regarding high patient satisfaction with ROs on Healthgrades [ 6 ], patient satisfaction literature examining hand surgeon ratings on three PRWs across the country [ 14 ], and literature on primary care physicians, medical specialists, surgical specialists, and obstetricians and gynecologists who practice in Virginia [ 1 ]. Given the current popularity of PRWs, the findings of this study are directly relevant to patients and ROs and can be viewed as additional data in the growing literature surrounding patient satisfaction.…”

“…Interestingly, while previous work has shown no relationship between ROs' experience level and higher online ratings [ 6 ], our study showed that ROs with more clinical experience (more than 10 years versus less than 10 years of experience) had a significantly higher OR. Other research has highlighted the opposite, including a study by Gao et al, that shows that younger physicians (those who had graduated from medical school after 2000) had higher ratings than their older counterparts [ 1 ].…”

“…PRWs, therefore, represent a unique opportunity to characterize how patients feel about their physicians and identify the variables that most significantly contribute to patients’ overall perception of their healthcare providers. Previous work by our group showed that patient satisfaction scores for radiation oncologists (ROs) were very strong on Healthgrades.com , and most patients leaving reviews were likely to recommend their own ROs to their friends and family [ 6 ].…”

Investigation of Radiation Oncologists’ Awareness of Online Reputation Management

“…A separate study performed by the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that 25% of US adults consulted online physician rating sites, and more than 33% of online viewers went to a physician or avoided one based on their ratings [9]. Furthermore, a recent study analyzed online Healthgrades reviews of 2679 radiation oncologists and found that their “likelihood to recommend to family and friends” score was significantly lower for physicians with fewer numbers of online reviews (<10) compared with colleagues with more than 10 reviews [10]. These are just a few examples that underscore the use of online health information and how public information might influence prospective patients.…”