Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jul 23;19(1):425.
doi: 10.1186/s13018-024-04881-y.

Assessing extremely negative online patient reviews and complaints of musculoskeletal oncology surgeons in the United States: a retrospective analysis

Kyle J Hitchman  1 , Anthony N Baumann  2 , Sarah E Welch  3 , Albert T Anastasio  4 , Kempland C Walley  5 , William Eward  4
Affiliations

Assessing extremely negative online patient reviews and complaints of musculoskeletal oncology surgeons in the United States: a retrospective analysis

Kyle J Hitchman et al. J Orthop Surg Res. .

Abstract

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.

Methods: Patient ratings and comments regarding musculoskeletal oncology surgeons from the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) were collected from Vitals.com. One-star reviews with comments were then classified as either operative or nonoperative. These complaints were then further classified based on content including wait time, uncontrolled pain, time spent with the physician, surgical outcomes, medical staff/institutional complaints, and bedside manner.

Results: A total of 169 reviews (375 complaints) from 181 physicians were included. Of these complaints, 198 were from patients in the operative category while 177 were from patients in the nonoperative category. Bedside manner was the most common complaint. Operative patients reported higher instances of uncontrolled pain in their reviews, whereas nonoperative patients more frequently cited wait time. No significant difference in the complaints that mentioned the amount of time spent with the physician, bedside manner, a disagreement with the plan, or the medical staff or institution was found.

Conclusion: Online one-star reviews of musculoskeletal oncology surgeons on Vitals.com referenced both surgical and non-surgical aspects of patient encounters, with bedside manner being the most popular complaint overall. Surgical patients were more likely to complain of uncontrolled pain whereas non-operative patients were more likely to complain of wait time.

Type of study: Outcomes 2c.

Keywords: Consumer preference; Decision making preference; Online reviews; Patient satisfaction; Physician review websites.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Proportions of complaints per group for the Operative group and the Non-Operative group. Categories of complaints included not enough time spent with the physician, wait time, bedside manner and patient experience, disagreement with plan or decision, uncontrolled pain, and medical staff or institution. For direct comparison purposes, the surgical outcomes or complications category was left out as this category only applied to the Operative group and not the Non-Operative group
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Gao GG, McCullough JS, Agarwal R, Jha AK. A changing landscape of physician quality reporting: analysis of patients⇔ online ratings of their physicians over a 5-year period. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14(1). 10.2196/jmir.2003. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hanauer DA, Zheng K, Singer DC, Gebremariam A, Davis MM. Public awareness, perception, and use of online physician rating sites. JAMA. 2014;311(7). 10.1001/jama.2013.283194. - PubMed
    1. Okike K, Peter-Bibb TK, Xie KC, Okike ON. Association between physician online rating and quality of care. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18(12). 10.2196/jmir.6612. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Daskivich TJ, Houman J, Fuller G, Black JT, Kim HL, Spiegel B. Online physician ratings fail to predict actual performance on measures of quality, value, and peer review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018;25(4). 10.1093/jamia/ocx083. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rastegar-Mojarad M, Ye Z, Wall D, Murali N, Lin S. Collecting and analyzing patient experiences of health care from social media. JMIR Res Protoc. 2015;4(3). 10.2196/resprot.3433. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources