Autonomic medical practice viewed through the lens of physician-rating websites

Clinical Autonomic Research - Tập 30 - Trang 335-341 - 2020
William P. Cheshire1
1Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, USA

Tóm tắt

To survey online patient ratings of physicians practicing autonomic medicine. Online patient review scores of US physician members of the American Autonomic Society were compared to scores of US physicians in general and to indices of professional expertise. The 68 autonomic physicians who had been rated scored 3.80 ± 0.82 on a composite five-star scale, in which 5 was the most favorable score, as compared to 3.84 ± 0.98 for all US physicians (no significant difference, p = 0.8). Scores correlated inversely with autonomic physicians’ number of scientific publications (p = 0.01), h-index (p = 0.01), and m-index (p = 0.0004). Scores of diplomates of the United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties certified in autonomic disorders or who were ranked in the top 1% of US physicians by Castle Connolly had scores comparable to those of other autonomic physicians. Scores did not correlate with physician gender, number of reviews, or years in practice. A quality patient experience, accurate diagnosis, and appropriate treatment are goals shared by patients and autonomic specialists. In this study, patient reviews of autonomic physicians were comparable to those of physicians across specialties. Metrics of greater autonomic expertise were associated with equal or lower patient satisfaction scores. In conclusion, compiled subjective reviews are a useful but incomplete indicator of autonomic physician quality and expertise. An ideal profile would combine clinical and nonclinical indicators of professional competence. Reliable information is needed to empower autonomic patients to make truly informed healthcare choices.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Burkle CM, Keegan MT (2015) Popularity of internet physician rating sites and their apparent influence on patients’ choices of physicians. BMC Health Serv Res 15:416

Campbell C (2019) How China is using “social credit scores” to reward and punish its citizens. Time, January 16, 2019. https://time.com/collection/davos-2019/5502592/china-social-credit-score/. Accessed 11 Dec 2019

Cheshire WP (2016) Stimulant medication and postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome: a tale of two cases. Clin Auton Res 26:229–233

Castle Connolly Medical Ltd., https://www.castleconnolly.com. Accessed 3 Dec 2019

Dong X (2016) Elder rights in China: care for your parents or suffer public shaming and desecrate your credit scores. JAMA Intern Med 176:1429–1430

Fraser H, Coiera E, Wong D (2018) Safety of patient-facing digital symptom checkers. Lancet 392:2263–2264

Goldstein DS, Cheshire WP Jr (2017) Autonomic function tests: introduction to the series. Clin Auton Res 27:141–143

Guo L, Jin B, Yao C, Yang H, Huang D, Wang F (2016) Which doctor to trust: a recommender system for identifying the right doctors. J Med Internet Res 18:e186

Hanauer DA, Zheng K, Singer DC, Gebremariam A, Davis MM (2014) Public awareness, perception, and use of online physician rating sites. JAMA 311:734–735

Hedges L (2019) How patients use online reviews. In: Software Advice, Austin, TX, February 11, 2019. https://www.softwareadvice.com/resources/how-patients-use-online-reviews/. Accessed 25 Nov 2019

Holliday AM, Kachalia A, Meyer GS, Sequist TD (2017) Physician and patient views on public physician rating websites: a cross-sectional study. J Gen Intern Med 32:626–631

Hong YA, Liang C, Radcliff TA, Wigfall LT, Street RL (2019) What do patients say about doctors online? A systematic review of studies on patient online reviews. J Med Internet Res 21:e12521

Jerant A, Fenton JJ, Kravitz RL, Tancredi DJ, Magnan E, Bertakis KD, Franks P (2018) Association of clinician denial of patient requests with patient satisfaction. JAMA Intern Med 178:85–91

Kadry B, Chu LF, Kadry B, Gammas D, Macario A (2011) Analysis of 4999 online physician ratings indicates that most patients give physicians a favorable rating. J Med Internet Res 13:e95

Kostka G (2019) China's social credit systems and public opinion: explaining high levels of approval. New Media Soc 21:1565–1593

Kowalczyk L (2019) This doctor posted online in favor of immunization. Then vaccine opponents targeted her. In: Boston Globe. Boston, MA, May 11, 2019. https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2019/05/11/vaccine-opponents-target-doctors-social-media-and-ratings-websites/Y8RQie1xJdr1RtKvbdR9mI/story.html. Accessed 12 Nov 2019

Lagu T, Hannon NS, Rothberg MB, Lindenauer PK (2010) Patients' evaluations of health care providers in the era of social networking: an analysis of physician-rating websites. J Gen Intern Med 25:942–946

Li H, Yu X, Liles C, Khan M, Vanderlinde-Wood M, Galloway A, Zillner C, Benbrook A, Reim S, Collier D, Hill MA, Raj SR, Okamoto LE, Cunningham MW, Aston CE, Kem DC (2014) Autoimmune basis for postural tachycardia syndrome. J Am Heart Assoc 3:e000755

London CG (2019) Canary in a coal mine. In: Op-Med. Doximity. https://opmed.doximity.com/articles/canary-in-a-coal-mine. Accessed 12 Nov 2019

McDermott M, Gelb DJ, Wilson K, Pawloski M, Burke JF, Shelgikar AV, London ZN (2018) Sex differences in academic rank and publication rate at top-ranked US neurology programs. JAMA Neurol 75:956–961

McGrath RJ, Priestley JL, Zhou Y, Culligan PJ (2018) The validity of online patient ratings of physicians: analysis of physician peer reviews and patient ratings. Interact J Med Res 7:e8

Millenson ML, Baldwin JL, Zipperer L, Singh H (2018) Beyond Dr. Google: the evidence on consumer-facing digital tools for diagnosis. Diagnosis (Berl) 5:95–105

Murphy GP, Awad MA, Osterberg EC, Gaither TW, Chumnarnsongkhroh T, Washington SL, Breyer BN (2017) Web-based physician ratings for California physicians on probation. J Med Internet Res 19:e254

Murphy GP, Radadia KD, Breyer BN (2019) Online physician reviews: is there a place for them? Risk Manag Healthc Policy 12:85–89

Nichols TM (2017) The death of expertise: the campaign against established knowledge and why it matters. Oxford University Press, New York

Numan MT, Kamdar A, Young J, Butler IJ (2017) Autologous adipose stem cell therapy for autonomic nervous system dysfunction in two young patients. Stem Cells Dev 26:391–393

Ruzieh M, Baugh A, Dasa O, Parker RL, Perrault JT, Renno A, Karabin BL, Grubb B (2017) Effects of intermittent intravenous saline infusions in patients with medication-refractory postural tachycardia syndrome. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 48:255–260

Schechter NL, Nurko S (2019) Unintentional symptom intensification by doctors. Pediatrics. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2018-3808

Schreiber WE, Giustini DM (2019) Measuring scientific impact with the h-Index: a primer for pathologists. Am J Clin Pathol 151:286–291

Segal J, Sacopulos MJ, Rivera DJ (2009) Legal remedies for online defamation of physicians. J Leg Med 30:349–388

Weinstock LB, Brook JB, Myers TL, Goodman B (2018) Successful treatment of postural orthostatic tachycardia and mast cell activation syndromes using naltrexone, immunoglobulin and antibiotic treatment. BMJ Case Rep. https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2017-221405

Widmer RJ, Maurer MJ, Nayar VR, Aase LA, Wald JT, Kotsenas AL, Timimi FK, Harper CM, Pruthi S (2018) Online physician reviews do not reflect patient satisfaction survey responses. Mayo Clin Proc 93:453–457

Yaraghi N, Wang W, Gao GG, Agarwal R (2018) How online quality ratings influence patients' choice of medical providers: controlled experimental survey study. J Med Internet Res 20:e99

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Clinical Autonomic Research

Tập 30

335-341

Thông tin tác giả