What Patients Say About Their Orthopaedic Hand and Wrist Surgeons: A Qualitative Analysis of Negative Reviews on Yelp

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Patients often turn to online reviews as a source of information to inform their decisions regarding care. Existing literature has analyzed factors associated with positive online patient ratings among hand and wrist surgeons. However, there is limited in-depth analysis of factors associated with low patient satisfaction for hand and wrist surgeons. The focus of this study is to examine and characterize extremely negative reviews of hand and wrist surgeons on Yelp.com.

Methods A search was performed using the keywords “hand surgery” on Yelp.com for eight major metropolitan areas including Washington DC, Dallas, New York, Phoenix, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Boston, and Seattle. Only single-star reviews (out of a possible 5 stars) of hand and wrist surgeons were included. The complaints in the 1-star reviews were then categorized into clinical and nonclinical categories.

Result A total of 233 single-star reviews were included for analysis, which resulted in 468 total complaints. Of these complaints, 81 (18.8%) were clinically related and 351 (81.3%) were nonclinical in nature. The most common clinical complaints were for complication (24 complaints, 6%), misdiagnosis (16 complaints, 4%), unclear treatment plan (16 complaints, 4%), and uncontrolled pain (15 complaints, 3%). The most common nonclinical complaints were for physician bedside manner (93 complaints, 22%), financially related (80 complaints, 19%), unprofessional nonclinical staff (61 complaints, 14%), and wait time (46 complaints, 11%). The difference in the number of complaints for surgical and nonsurgical patients was statistically significant (p < 0.05) for complication and uncontrolled pain.

Clinical Relevance Patient satisfaction is dependent on a multitude of clinical and nonclinical factors. An awareness of online physician ratings is essential for hand and wrist surgeons to maintain and improve patient care and patient satisfaction. We believe the results of our study could be used to further improve the quality of care provided by hand and wrist surgeons.

Publication History

Received: 13 March 2022

Accepted: 03 April 2023

Article published online:
17 August 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

• References

• 1 Crowe CS, Massenburg BB, Morrison SD. et al. Global trends of hand and wrist trauma: a systematic analysis of fracture and digit amputation using the Global Burden of Disease 2017 Study. Inj Prev 2020; 26 (Supp 1): i115-i124
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Bebbington E, Furniss D. Linear regression analysis of Hospital Episode Statistics predicts a large increase in demand for elective hand surgery in England. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2015; 68 (02) 243-251
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Wildin C, Dias JJ, Heras-Palou C, Bradley MJ, Burke FD. Trends in elective hand surgery referrals from primary care. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2006; 88 (06) 543-546
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Hanauer DA, Zheng K, Singer DC, Gebremariam A, Davis MM. Public awareness, perception, and use of online physician rating sites. JAMA 2014; 311 (07) 734-735
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Lagu T, Hannon NS, Rothberg MB, Lindenauer PK. Patients' evaluations of health care providers in the era of social networking: an analysis of physician-rating websites. J Gen Intern Med 2010; 25 (09) 942-946
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Ziemba JB, Allaf ME, Haldeman D. Consumer preferences and online comparison tools used to select a surgeon. JAMA Surg 2017; 152 (04) 410-411
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Burkle CM, Keegan MT. Popularity of internet physician rating sites and their apparent influence on patients' choices of physicians. BMC Health Serv Res 2015; 15: 416
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Reimann S, Strech D. The representation of patient experience and satisfaction in physician rating sites. A criteria-based analysis of English- and German-language sites. BMC Health Serv Res 2010; 10: 332
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Fenton JJ, Jerant AF, Bertakis KD, Franks P. The cost of satisfaction. a national study of patient satisfaction, health care utilization, expenditures, and mortality. Arch Intern Med 2012; 172 (05) 405-411
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Trehan SK, DeFrancesco CJ, Nguyen JT, Charalel RA, Daluiski A. Online patient ratings of hand surgeons. J Hand Surg Am 2016; 41 (01) 98-103
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Bakhsh W, Mesfin A. Online ratings of orthopedic surgeons: analysis of 2185 reviews. Am J Orthop 2014; 43 (08) 359-363
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Kirkpatrick W, Abboudi J, Kim N. et al. An assessment of online reviews of hand surgeons. Arch Bone Jt Surg 2017; 5 (03) 139-144
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Frost C, Mesfin A. Online reviews of orthopedic surgeons: an emerging trend. Orthopedics 2015; 38 (04) e257-e262
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Pollock JR, Arthur JR, Smith JF. et al. The majority of complaints about orthopedic sports surgeons on Yelp are nonclinical. Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil 2021; 3 (05) e1465-e1472
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Arthur JR, Etzioni D, Schwartz AJ. Characterizing extremely negative reviews of total joint arthroplasty practices and surgeons on Yelp.com. Arthroplast Today 2019; 5 (02) 216-220
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Richman EH, Ogbaudu E, Pollock JR. et al. Characterizing negative online reviews of pediatric orthopaedic surgeons. J Pediatr Orthop 2022; 42 (05) e533-e537
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 AP-NORC. Finding quality doctors: how Americans evaluate provider quality in the United States. Accessed January 7, 2021 at: https://apnorc.org/projects/finding-quality-doctors-how-americans-evaluate-provider-quality-in-the-united-states/
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Sabin JE. Physician-rating websites. Virtual Mentor 2013; 15 (11) 932-936
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Smith RJ, Lipoff JB. Evaluation of dermatology practice online reviews: lessons from qualitative analysis. JAMA Dermatol 2016;152(02):153-7
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Emmert M, Meier F, Heider AK, Dürr C, Sander U. What do patients say about their physicians? An analysis of 3000 narrative comments posted on a German physician rating website. Health Policy 2014; 118 (01) 66-73
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 López A, Detz A, Ratanawongsa N, Sarkar U. What patients say about their doctors online: a qualitative content analysis. J Gen Intern Med 2012; 27 (06) 685-692
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 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 (01) e38
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Vranceanu AM, Ring D. Factors associated with patient satisfaction. J Hand Surg Am 2011; 36 (09) 1504-1508
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Menendez ME, Chen NC, Mudgal CS, Jupiter JB, Ring D. Physician empathy as a driver of hand surgery patient satisfaction. J Hand Surg Am 2015; 40 (09) 1860-5.e2
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Uhas AA, Camacho FT, Feldman SR, Balkrishnan R. The relationship between physician friendliness and caring, and patient satisfaction: findings from an internet-based survey. Patient 2008; 1 (02) 91-96
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 Parrish II RC, Menendez ME, Mudgal CS, Jupiter JB, Chen NC, Ring D. Patient satisfaction and its relation to perceived visit duration with a hand surgeon. J Hand Surg Am 2016; 41 (02) 257-62.e1 , 4
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 Teunis T, Thornton ER, Jayakumar P, Ring D. Time seeing a hand surgeon is not associated with patient satisfaction. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473 (07) 2362-2368
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 Riess H, Kelley JM, Bailey RW, Dunn EJ, Phillips M. Empathy training for resident physicians: a randomized controlled trial of a neuroscience-informed curriculum. J Gen Intern Med 2012; 27 (10) 1280-1286
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 29 Kupfer JM, Bond EU. Patient satisfaction and patient-centered care: necessary but not equal. JAMA 2012; 308 (02) 139-140
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 30 Chang JT, Hays RD, Shekelle PG. et al. Patients' global ratings of their health care are not associated with the technical quality of their care. Ann Intern Med 2006; 144 (09) 665-672
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 31 Robinson LS, Sarkies M, Brown T, O'Brien L. Direct, indirect and intangible costs of acute hand and wrist injuries: a systematic review. Injury 2016; 47 (12) 2614-2626
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 32 Dekhne MS, Nuliyalu U, Schoenfeld AJ, Dimick JB, Chhabra KR. “Surprise” out-of-network billing in orthopedic surgery: charges from surprising sources. Ann Surg 2020; 271 (05) e116-e118
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 33 Bluth R. 1 In 6 Insured Hospital Patients Get a Surprise Bill for Out-Of-Network Care. Kaiser Health News. Accessed January 4, 2020 at: https://khn.org/news/1-in-6-insured-hospital-patients-get-a-surprise-bill-for-out-of-network-care/
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 34 Alokozai A, Crijns TJ, Janssen SJ. et al. Cost in hand surgery: the patient perspective. J Hand Surg Am 2019; 44 (11) 992.e1-992.e26
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 35 Emmert M, Meszmer N, Sander U. Do health care providers use online patient ratings to improve the quality of care? Results from an online-based cross-sectional study. J Med Internet Res 2016; 18 (09) e254
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar