Online Reputations: Comparing Hospital- and Patient-Generated Ratings in Academic Otolaryngology

Area of Science:

• Medical Informatics
• Healthcare Management
• Otolaryngology Online Reputation

Background:

• Online physician ratings are increasingly influential in patient decision-making.
• Discrepancies exist between hospital-reported and patient-reported online physician evaluations.
• Understanding these differences is crucial for academic otolaryngology practices.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare hospital-generated online ratings with patient-generated ratings for academic otolaryngologists.
• To identify physician-specific factors influencing these online ratings.
• To analyze the impact of rating source and physician characteristics on perceived quality.

Main Methods:

• Assessed academic otolaryngologists' websites for hospital-generated Press Ganey surveys.
• Identified corresponding patient-generated ratings on Healthgrades and Vitals.com.
• Compared rating scores, demographics, and volume across different platforms.

Main Results:

• Hospital-generated ratings (mean 4.70) were significantly higher than patient-generated ratings (Vitals: 4.26, Healthgrades: 4.02).
• Patient-generated ratings showed higher volume (>20) associated with male gender, professor rank, and >30 years in practice.
• Professors and otologists/neurotologists received lower patient-generated scores, while >30 years of practice correlated with lower hospital-generated scores.

Conclusions:

• Hospital-generated ratings inflate scores compared to patient-generated platforms.
• Physician demographics and academic standing significantly influence patient-generated reviews, not hospital-generated ones.
• Awareness of rating variability is essential for physicians due to potential impacts on referrals and practice patterns.