Purpose: To perform a retrospective characterization of one-star reviews of ophthalmologists on Yelp.com and to increase understanding of patient complaints on Yelp.com.
Methods: A search was performed for reviews on Yelp.com using the keyword "ophthalmologist" for the top 8 most population-dense metropolitan areas in the United States. One-star reviews were collected and classified as procedural or nonprocedural. Complaints were also categorized as clinical, nonclinical, or both. Clinical complaints cited issues such as complications, reoperations, uncontrolled pain, misdiagnosis, unclear treatment plan, etc. Nonclinical complaints included comments such as physician bedside manner, other staff interpersonal manner, wait time, brevity of appointment time, etc.
Results: 5,532 total reviews were assessed, of which 477 (9%) one-star reviews were included in the study for analysis. These reviews amounted to 1,120 distinct complaints. 287 (26%) were clinical in nature and 833 (74%) were nonclinical. Technical incompetence or error (50: 4%), unsatisfactory results (46: 4%), and complications (43: 4%) represented the most common clinical complaints while office staff interpersonal manner (182: 16%), wait time (174: 16%), and physician interpersonal manner (141: 13%) were the most common nonclinical complaints. Refractive surgery was the most frequently mentioned subspecialty (89: 8%). Patients undergoing an ophthalmic procedure (surgery, injection, etc.) wrote 64 reviews that resulted in 193 (17%) complaints. Nonprocedural patients wrote 413 reviews that resulted in 927 (83%) complaints. Compared with procedural reviews, nonprocedural reviews were less likely to include a clinical complaint (rate ratio, 0.3: < .001).
Discussion: The majority of one-star reviews of ophthalmologists included in this study were nonclinical. Complaints referencing a procedural episode were more likely to include a clinical component in the review. In the era of intense medical consumerism and increased physician and health care institution competition for patient acquisition and retention, the characterization of excessively negative reviews allows identification of potential areas of concern for patients that use online review sites such as Yelp.com.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08820538.2022.2064193 | DOI Listing |
J Orthop Surg Res
July 2024
Department of Orthopaedics, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Introduction: Physician-review websites (PRWs) are commonly used by patients while searching for a surgeon. There is no current literature investigating the factors that contribute to online one-star reviews of musculoskeletal oncology surgeons. This retrospective study aims to identify these factors to determine areas of care affecting patient's subjective reviews.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAm J Otolaryngol
June 2024
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Objective: To characterize extremely negative online reviews of Otolaryngologists in the United States.
Methods: A search for reviews was performed on Yelp.com using the keyword "Otolaryngologist" in four major urban cities in the United States.
Am J Audiol
June 2024
Department of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, University of Pretoria, South Africa.
Purpose: The aim of this study was to examine the hearing health care experience of satisfied and dissatisfied consumers as reported on Google reviews.
Method: Using qualitative thematic analysis, open-text responses from Google regarding hearing health care clinics across 40 U.S.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976)
June 2024
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
Design: Retrospective review.
Objective: Characterize negative reviews of spine surgeons in the United States.
Summary: Physician rating websites significantly influence the selection of doctors by other patients.
Foot Ankle Surg
April 2024
Department of Orthopaedics, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Background: Despite the questionable validity of online-based physician review websites (PRWs), negative reviews can adversely affect a provider's practice. Several investigations have explored the effect of extremely negative "one-star" reviews across subspecialties such as adult reconstruction, sports medicine, and orthopaedic traumatology; however, to date, no study has explored one-star reviews in foot and ankle surgery. The goal of this study was to characterize factors that contribute to extremely negative, one-star reviews for foot and ankle surgeons on Vitals.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!