A cross-sectional study assessing the association between online ratings and structural and quality of care measures : results from two German physician rating websites

BACKGROUND: Even though physician rating websites (PRWs) have been gaining in importance in both practice and research, little evidence is available on the association of patients' online ratings with the quality of care of physicians. It thus remains unclear whether patients should rely on these ratings when selecting a physician. The objective of this study was to measure the association between online ratings and structural and quality of care measures for 65 physician practices from the German Integrated Health Care Network "Quality and Efficiency" (QuE). METHODS: Online reviews from two German PRWs were included which covered a three-year period (2011 to 2013) and included 1179 and 991 ratings, respectively. Information for 65 QuE practices was obtained for the year 2012 and included 21 measures related to structural information (N = 6), process quality (N = 10), intermediate outcomes (N = 2), patient satisfaction (N = 1), and costs (N = 2). The Spearman rank coefficient of correlation was applied to measure the association between ratings and practice-related information. RESULTS: Patient satisfaction results from offline surveys and the patients per doctor ratio in a practice were shown to be significantly associated with online ratings on both PRWs. For one PRW, additional significant associations could be shown between online ratings and cost-related measures for medication, preventative examinations, and one diabetes type 2-related intermediate outcome measure. There again, results from the second PRW showed significant associations with the age of the physicians and the number of patients per practice, four process-related quality measures for diabetes type 2 and asthma, and one cost-related measure for medication. CONCLUSIONS: Several significant associations were found which varied between the PRWs. Patients interested in the satisfaction of other patients with a physician might select a physician on the basis of online ratings. Even though our results indicate associations with some diabetes and asthma measures, but not with coronary heart disease measures, there is still insufficient evidence to draw strong conclusions. The limited number of practices in our study may have weakened our findings.

Talking about depression:an analogue study of physician gender and communication style on patient disclosures

Objectives: To disentangle the effects of physician gender and patient-centered communication style on patients' oral engagement in depression care. Methods: Physician gender, physician race and communication style (high patient-centered (HPC) and low patient-centered (LPC)) were manipulated and presented as videotaped actors within a computer simulated medical visit to assess effects on analogue patient (AP) verbal responsiveness and care ratings. 307 APs (56% female; 70% African American) were randomly assigned to conditions and instructed to verbally respond to depression-related questions and indicate willingness to continue care. Disclosures were coded using Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS). Results: Both male and female APs talked more overall and conveyed more psychosocial and emotional talk to HPC gender discordant doctors (all p <.05). APs were more willing to continue treatment with gender-discordant HPC physicians (p <.05). No effects were evident in the LPC condition. Conclusions: Findings highlight a role for physician gender when considering active patient engagement in patient-centered depression care. This pattern suggests that there may be largely under-appreciated and consequential effects associated with patient expectations in regard to physician gender that these differ by patient gender. Practice implications: High patient-centeredness increases active patient engagement in depression care especially in gender discordant dyads. © 2014.

Physician choice making and characteristics associated with using physician-rating websites: cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, physician-rating websites have been gaining attention in scientific literature and in the media. However, little knowledge is available about the awareness and the impact of using such sites on health care professionals. It also remains unclear what key predictors are associated with the knowledge and the use of physician-rating websites. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the current level of awareness and use of physician-rating websites in Germany and to determine their impact on physician choice making and the key predictors which are associated with the knowledge and the use of physician-rating websites. METHODS: This study was designed as a cross-sectional survey. An online panel was consulted in January 2013. A questionnaire was developed containing 28 questions; a pretest was carried out to assess the comprehension of the questionnaire. Several sociodemographic (eg, age, gender, health insurance status, Internet use) and 2 health-related independent variables (ie, health status and health care utilization) were included. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and t tests. Binary multivariate logistic regression models were performed for elaborating the characteristics of physician-rating website users. Results from the logistic regression are presented for both the observed and weighted sample. RESULTS: In total, 1505 respondents (mean age 43.73 years, SD 14.39; 857/1505, 57.25% female) completed our survey. Of all respondents, 32.09% (483/1505) heard of physician-rating websites and 25.32% (381/1505) already had used a website when searching for a physician. Furthermore, 11.03% (166/1505) had already posted a rating on a physician-rating website. Approximately 65.35% (249/381) consulted a particular physician based on the ratings shown on the websites; in contrast, 52.23% (199/381) had not consulted a particular physician because of the publicly reported ratings. Significantly higher likelihoods for being aware of the websites could be demonstrated for female participants (P<.001), those who were widowed (P=.01), covered by statutory health insurance (P=.02), and with higher health care utilization (P<.001). Health care utilization was significantly associated with all dependent variables in our multivariate logistic regression models (P<.001). Furthermore, significantly higher scores could be shown for health insurance status in the unweighted and Internet use in the weighted models. CONCLUSIONS: Neither health policy makers nor physicians should underestimate the influence of physician-rating websites. They already play an important role in providing information to help patients decide on an appropriate physician. Assuming there will be a rising level of public awareness, the influence of their use will increase well into the future. Future studies should assess the impact of physician-rating websites under experimental conditions and investigate whether physician-rating websites have the potential to reflect the quality of care offered by health care providers.

Eight Questions About Physician-Rating Websites: A Systematic Review

Background: Physician-rating websites are currently gaining in popularity because they increase transparency in the health care system. However, research on the characteristics and content of these portals remains limited. Objective: To identify and synthesize published evidence in peer-reviewed journals regarding frequently discussed issues about physician-rating websites. Methods: Peer-reviewed English and German language literature was searched in seven databases (Medline (via PubMed), the Cochrane Library, Business Source Complete, ABI/Inform Complete, PsycInfo, Scopus, and ISI web of knowledge) without any time constraints. Additionally, reference lists of included studies were screened to assure completeness. The following eight previously defined questions were addressed: 1) What percentage of physicians has been rated? 2) What is the average number of ratings on physician-rating websites? 3) Are there any differences among rated physicians related to socioeconomic status? 4) Are ratings more likely to be positive or negative? 5) What significance do patient narratives have? 6) How should physicians deal with physician-rating websites? 7) What major shortcomings do physician-rating websites have? 8) What recommendations can be made for further improvement of physician-rating websites? Results: Twenty-four articles published in peer-reviewed journals met our inclusion criteria. Most studies were published by US (n=13) and German (n=8) researchers; however, the focus differed considerably. The current usage of physician-rating websites is still low but is increasing. International data show that 1 out of 6 physicians has been rated, and approximately 90% of all ratings on physician-rating websites were positive. Although often a concern, we could not find any evidence of "doctor-bashing". Physicians should not ignore these websites, but rather, monitor the information available and use it for internal and ex-ternal purpose. Several shortcomings limit the significance of the results published on physician-rating websites; some recommendations to address these limitations are presented. Conclusions: Although the number of publications is still low, physician-rating websites are gaining more attention in research. But the current condition of physician-rating websites is lacking. This is the case both in the United States and in Germany. Further research is necessary to increase the quality of the websites, especially from the patients’ perspective.

Do health care providers use online patient ratings to improve the quality of care?

Background: Physician-rating websites have become a popular tool to create more transparency about the quality of health care providers. So far, it remains unknown whether online-based rating websites have the potential to contribute to a better standard of care. Objective: Our goal was to examine which health care providers use online rating websites and for what purposes, and whether health care providers use online patient ratings to improve patient care. Methods: We conducted an online-based cross-sectional study by surveying 2360 physicians and other health care providers (September 2015). In addition to descriptive statistics, we performed multilevel logistic regression models to ascertain the effects of providers' demographics as well as report card-related variables on the likelihood that providers implement measures to improve patient care. Results: Overall, more than half of the responding providers surveyed (54.66%, 1290/2360) used online ratings to derive measures to improve patient care (implemented measures: mean 3.06, SD 2.29). Ophthalmologists (68%, 40/59) and gynecologists (65.4%, 123/188) were most likely to implement any measures. The most widely implemented quality measures were related to communication with patients (28.77%, 679/2360), the appointment scheduling process (23.60%, 557/2360), and office workflow (21.23%, 501/2360). Scaled-survey results had a greater impact on deriving measures than narrative comments. Multilevel logistic regression models revealed medical specialty, the frequency of report card use, and the appraisal of the trustworthiness of scaled-survey ratings to be significantly associated predictors for implementing measures to improve patient care because of online ratings. Conclusions: Our results suggest that online ratings displayed on physician-rating websites have an impact on patient care. Despite the limitations of our study and unintended consequences of physician-rating websites, they still may have the potential to improve patient care.

A shift from passive teaching at medical conferences to more interactive methods improves physician learning

Conferences that deliver interactive sessions designed to enhance physician participation, such as role play, small discussion groups, workshops, hands-on training, problem- or case-based learning and individualised training sessions, are effective for physician education.

Advice on exercise from a family physician can help sedentary patients to become active

Objectives: To test the effectiveness, in the setting of primary health care, of verbal advice on exercise from a family physician (FP) combined with supporting written information. Design: A controlled trial with subjects allocated to a control group or one of two intervention groups using a balanced design based on day of the week. Setting: Ten general practices in Perth, Western Australia. Subjects: All sedentary patients consulting an FP. Intervention: Verbal advice on exercise from the FP and a pamphlet on exercise mailed to the patient's home address within 2 days of his/her visit to the doctor. Main outcome measure: Level of physical activity at followup. Results: 6,351 adult patients attending an FP practice completed a screening questionnaire, and 763 sedentary adults were recruited to the project. The response to follow-up, via a postal survey at 1, 6, and 12 months after the index consultation was 70%, 60%, and 57%, respectively. At 1 month a subsample of the control and intervention subjects were contacted for a telephone interview to verify self-reported levels of activity (n = 136). Treating all nonresponders as sedentary, at 1 month significantly more subjects in the combined intervention groups reported doing some physical activity (40%) compared with the control group (31%). Similarly, at 6 months, 30% of the control group and 38% of the combined intervention groups were now active. There was very little change at followup at 12 months (31% control and 36% intervention groups, respectively). Conclusion: A simple intervention aimed at the promotion of physical activity to sedentary patients in general practice can help reduce inactivity.

Is affective learning really resistant to extinction? Stimulus ratings and affective priming give different answers

Affective learning, the learning of likes and dislikes, is proposed to differ from signal learning, the learning of relationships between events. However, affective learning research varies in the methodology used, and in addition, researchers concerned primarily with affective learning tend to use different paradigms from those concerned with signal learning. The current research used an affective priming task in addition to verbal ratings to assess changes in the valence of neutral geometric shapes in an aversive differential conditioning procedure. After acquisition, affective learning was present as indexed by ratings and affective priming, whereas after extinction, affective learning remained significant only in the ratings. This study suggests that different measures of affective learning may be differentially sensitive to valence, which has implications for studies that employ verbal ratings as the sole measure of affective learning. Moreover, there is no evidence from the current study that affective learning differs from signal learning.

Appraisal ratings, halo, and selection: A study using sales staff

Supervisor ratings are useful criteria for the validation of selection instruments but maybe limited because of the presence of rating errors, such as halo. This study set out to show that supervisor ratings which are high in halo remain successful criteria in selection. Following a thorough job analysis, a customer service questionnaire was designed to assess the potential of retail sales staff on three orthogonal subscales labelled Dealing with people, Emotions and energy, and Solitary style. These subscales were uncorrelated with supervisor ratings made about 8 weeks later. However, the supervisor ratings were correlated with an overall scale derived from the three scales of the customer service questionnaire. These results support the view that supervisor ratings generally consist of global impressions and suggest that these global impressions are useful measures of overall performances. This field study confirms laboratory results that halo does not necessarily reduce rating accuracy.

Older adults' trait ratings of three age groups around the Pacific rim

In this paper, we assess the traits that older adultsassociate with younger, middle-aged, and older adults in fivePacific Rim nations from Western and Eastern cultural traditions(Australia, People's Republic of China (PRC), Hong Kong,Philippines, Thailand). We find cross-cultural trends whichreplicate patterns found in the US context. In most cultures,attractiveness, strength, activity, liberalism, health, andflexibility are seen to decline with increasing age. Kindnessassessments are positively associated with age across cultures. Mixed patterns are found with assessments of wisdom andgenerosity, with respondents from the PRC and Hong Kong beingnotably more negative about increasing age than otherrespondents. Implications for the aging process across culturesare discussed, and suggestions made for future research.