Evaluation of Dermatology Practice Online Reviews

Abstract

IMPORTANCE Patient satisfaction is an increasingly important component of health care quality measures. Online reviews of physicians represent a promising platform for capturing patient perspectives of care. OBJECTIVE To identify qualitative themes associated with patient reviews of dermatologic care on consumer reporting websites. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A qualitative analysis was conducted of patient-generated reviews of dermatology practices on 2 consumer review platforms. Yelp is an online consumer portal for users to review their experience with local businesses; ZocDoc is an online patient-scheduling portal that provides opportunity for patients to write reviews of physician practices. A total of 518 reviews from 45 dermatology practices on Yelp and 4921 reviews from 45 dermatology providers on ZocDoc were collected from 3 geographically diverse cities: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Houston, Texas; and Seattle, Washington. The study was conducted from January 15 to July 15, 2015. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Reviews were separated into high-scoring and low-scoring groups. An inductive qualitative method was used to code and identify key themes associated with positive and negative patient experiences. Analysis was completed upon reaching thematic saturation. RESULTS Reported as mean (95% CI), the overall Yelp score for the 45 selected practices was 3.46 of 5 stars (3.17-3.75) and overall ZocDoc score for the 45 selected practices was 4.72 of 5 stars (4.47-4.80). The proportion of individual reviews giving a score of 5.0 was significantly higher on ZocDoc (3986 [81.0%]) than on Yelp (229 [44.2%]) (P < .001). Qualitative themes centered on characteristics of the physician and the practice. Themes that emerged from the high-scoring and low-scoring reviews were similar in content but opposite in valence. Physician-specific themes included temperament, knowledge and competency, physical examination, communication abilities, and mindfulness of cost. Practice-specific themes included scheduling, staff temperament, office cleanliness, waiting room, and insurance. Patients appreciated physicians who are kind, respectful, and thorough with the physical examination; empathetic about the emotional difficulty of skin disease; and cognizant of cost. Negative experiences were frequently affected by considerations outside of the physician-patient interaction, such as curt interactions with staff, difficulty with scheduling, practice cleanliness, and insurance problems. Patients reported relying on consumer websites to identify dermatology providers. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Online consumer review websites are designed to facilitate instantaneous and public communication among patients. These platforms provide elaborate and timely data for dermatologists to garner insight into their patients' experiences. The themes identified in this study are consistent with past satisfaction studies and may aid dermatologists in optimizing the patient care experience.

Characterizing extremely negative reviews of total joint arthroplasty practices and surgeons on yelp.com

“…Previous studies across various specialties have attempted to compare provider quality scores between more conventional data-driven metrics and crowd-sourced information. In the field of dermatology, Smith and Lipoff [23] categorized patient ratings on Yelp and ZocDoc into high-scoring and low-scoring groups. High-scoring reviews were associated with physician temperament, knowledge and competency, physical examination, communication abilities, and mindfulness of cost.…”

How Do Waterpipe Smoking Establishments Attract Smokers? Implications for Policy

“…However, we minimized this bias by having three researchers extract and code important themes, and by using a team analysis system. Finally, by focusing on the comparison of high-scoring and low-scoring reviews, we have attempted to maximize internal validity (Smith & Lipoff, 2016).…”

“…In the new era of online connectivity, public and social Internet forums such as Yelp (http://www.yelp.com) allow businesses to promote themselves online, and at the same time allow individuals to rate these businesses and share their experience by providing feedback through written reviews. These reviews provide a unique low-cost mode to obtain instantaneous, honest and public feedback from waterpipe establishments’ customers which could allow more elaborate and timely data than traditional surveys (Smith & Lipoff, 2016). Therefore, with a focus on implications for waterpipe regulation, the purposes of this study were to: 1) describe waterpipe establishments’ characteristics and their online marketing practices; 2) conduct a systematic and comprehensive qualitative assessment of their online customers’ reviews on Yelp to gain insight into customers’ positive and negative perceptions about waterpipe establishments and waterpipe products (tobacco, device and accessories, charcoal); and 3) identify features that are most important to customers.…”

Werbung oder Information in der Ophthalmologie?

“…So legitim eine positive Darstellung des angebotenen Leistungsspektrums ist, so problematisch ist es, wenn die differenzierte Wirklichkeit und Notwendigkeit zur kritischen Indikationsstellung in den Hintergrund rückt und einseitig angepriesen wird. Mit dem Aufkommen des Internets und der mobilen Kommunikation ist es Patienten und Kollegen möglich, jederzeit zu recherchieren und Informationen mit einem Klick abzurufen [31]. Die Bewertung in Online-Portalen korreliert kaum oder gar nicht mit objektiven Parametern [32]; davon abgesehen gibt es klare Belege, dass die sichtbaren Noten stark mit dem finanziellen Engagement, also dem Verdienst des Portalbetreibers assoziiert sind.…”

“…Obwohl Wettbewerb und das Bemühen um gute Medizin ("Tue Gutes und spreche darüber") als solches auch in Gesundheitsberufen nichts Schlechtes sind, müssen die juristischen Grenzen eingehalten werden. Das grundsätzliche Ziel von Werbung, Aufmerksamkeit und Interesse zu wecken, dürfen auch Ärzte verfolgen [31]. Die Grenze der Angemessenheit ärztlicher Information und Werbung ist allerdings klar überschritten, wenn die Darstellung Übertreibungen aufweist, aufdrängend oder gar belästigend wirkt.…”