Rating Spine Surgeons: Physician Review Websites Versus a Patient-reported Outcomes-derived Ranking.
Publication/Presentation Date
10-1-2022
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: This was an observational study.
OBJECTIVES: This study aims to determine the correlation between patient-reported outcomes (PROs) pulled from a national spine registry and physician ratings from physician review websites (PRWs).
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: PRWs are frequently utilized by patients to make health care decisions; however, many PRWs appear to incorporate subjective experiences unrelated to a surgeon's clinical performance into ratings. As such, their utility as a health care decision-making tool remains unclear.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study evaluated 8834 patients from the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) who underwent 1-level elective lumbar spine surgery. The lumbar module of QOD was queried to rank 124 surgeons using PROs (Oswestry Disability Index, EuroQOL, Numerical Rating Scale-back/leg pain, and patient satisfaction). The QOD PRO-ranking system was compared against PRWs including Healthgrades, Vitals, WebMD, and Google. The Spearman correlation coefficients, Kruskal-Wallis tests, and multiple linear regression models were used for statistical comparison. The primary outcome was the correlation between PRW scores and PROs.
RESULTS: Surgeon PRO-derived ranking showed high intercorrelational congruence with coefficients between the 3 PROs (Oswestry Disability Index, EuroQOL, Numerical Rating Scale back/leg) ranging between 0.70 and 0.88. Low correlations were observed between PRO-derived rankings and PRWs, ranging from 0.23 to 0.37. Healthgrades performed most similarly to PRO-derived rankings, correlating best with patient satisfaction, though the correlation was low (ρ=0.37).
CONCLUSIONS: While PRWs are often used to evaluate surgeon competency, these results demonstrate they poorly correlate with a surgeon's clinical ability measured by PROs. PRWs should be used with caution when making health care decisions by patients, payers, and administrators.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
Volume
35
Issue
8
First Page
643
Last Page
643
ISSN
2380-0194
Published In/Presented At
Wanner, J. P., Pennings, J. S., Nian, H., Sivaganesan, A., Gupta, R., Asher, A. L., Bydon, M., Abtahi, A., Zuckerman, S. L., Devin, C., Archer, K. R., & Stephens, B. F., 2nd (2022). Rating Spine Surgeons: Physician Review Websites Versus a Patient-reported Outcomes-derived Ranking. Clinical spine surgery, 35(8), E643–E648. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000001333
Disciplines
Business Administration, Management, and Operations | Health and Medical Administration | Management Sciences and Quantitative Methods
PubMedID
35509107
Department(s)
Administration and Leadership
Document Type
Article