Massachusetts General (www.massgeneral.org/patient-experience/ratings-process) also includes information about its ratings process, clearly stating that patient comments won’t be posted until a provider has at least five comments from patients during the previous 12 months; physician ratings will not be publicly posted until a provider has ratings from at least 30 patients in the previous 12 months. That’s a smart move, according to Alan Micco, MD, a professor of otolaryngology–head and neck surgery, medical education, and neurological surgery at Northwestern Medicine in Chicago.
Explore This Issue
July 2023“My feeling is that reviews and ratings really shouldn’t be made public unless they reach a critical mass,” Dr. Micco said, “because if you have only five reviews and one person gives you a bad score, you’re going to fall below national means.”
Clearly, there isn’t universal agreement regarding how to best rate physicians or share patient satisfaction scores. The fact remains, though, that patients and families want to know about others’ experiences with physicians. As many as 70% of patients report that reviews influence their selection of providers (Laryngoscope. 2021;131:2204–2210).
The Problems with Patient Reviews
Understanding the limitations of patient reviews and satisfaction scores—and the unintended negative effects of publicly sharing patient feedback—may eventually lead to the creation of better measures of physician ability, affability, and availability, as well as improved processes for information sharing. Here are four common concerns:
Surveys may not accurately assess physician care. Early generation third-party patient satisfaction surveys often asked about things outside of the physicians’ purview, such as wait time. Newer surveys ask about how providers manage long wait times. That’s a step in the right direction, Dr. Citardi said. “The question now is, ‘Did someone tell you about your wait time?’” he said. “The questions have improved.”
A patient–doctor interaction is a contract, of sorts. How can my patient sign that contract if I don’t educate him or her well enough? —Alan Micco, MD
Yet, patients still comment on things like parking availability and facility conditions and may rate a provider poorly based on factors beyond physicians’ control. As chair of the department of otolaryngology at Henry Ford Health in Detroit, Kathleen Yaremchuk, MD, reviews the patient satisfaction scores and feedback for everyone in her department weekly and refers comments about non-physician concerns to the appropriate departments so they can be addressed.
Current surveys may not accurately reflect clinical performance, either. As noted in a 2022 Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Viewpoint article, most survey instruments were initially “optimized to evaluate patient experience as a broad component of care quality” and “are not responsive to the performance of individual physicians or care teams” (2022;328:2209). Because most patients don’t have medical backgrounds or training, some institutions won’t publish patient comments about clinicians’ diagnoses or treatments.
“If a patient makes a comment like, ‘Dr. X didn’t give me the right medicine or diagnosis,’ our system may remove them,” Dr. Micco said.
At present, most surveys and published reviews also don’t include any information about physicians’ clinical competency. “Surgical complication rates, inappropriate use of antibiotics, inappropriate ordering of radiology—those would be additional data points that I think would be generally nice to have,” Dr. Bleier said, while noting that such information is currently difficult to collect, compare, and put into context for patients.
Implicit bias may also influence patient satisfaction scores and reviews. A cross-sectional analysis of patient satisfaction data collected after outpatient otolaryngology visits from 2017 to 2020 found that older, male, White patients typically reported higher levels of patient satisfaction, while a “significantly higher” percentage of patients who were younger or self-identified as female, Black, Hispanic, and Asian gave lower patient satisfaction scores (Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2022;166:1055–1061). The authors note that it’s impossible to determine “whether these ratings are due to survey response patterns or differential care.”
Doctors cannot respond to patient feedback. Although patient satisfaction scores and reviews are anonymous, physicians can sometimes figure out who left a particular comment based upon the included details. And, sometimes, a doctor will learn that a patient was displeased with an interaction that the physician thought went well. “You think, ‘That wasn’t how I would have rated that experience. I wonder where the communication broke down during that visit?’” Dr. Bleier said.
But currently, there’s no system for physicians to follow up with patients and discuss experiences patients perceived negatively. “I think some reciprocity to the process would be very helpful. We’d like the opportunity to course correct and learn from negative interactions,” Dr. Bleier said.
Physicians would also like to let patients know that their concerns have been noted and addressed. “We’d like to say, ‘Thanks for your feedback. We took care of that, and we hope this doesn’t happen again,’” Dr. Yaremchuk added.
Some institutions give physicians the right to appeal comments. At Northwestern, doctors can review patient satisfaction scores and comments before they’re published. “We’re allowed to appeal one or two every year,” Dr. Micco said. “If I disagree with something—maybe a comment had nothing to do with the visit but was more about getting the appointment, or the comment assumes medical knowledge—I can appeal. Most of the time, they’ll give it to us.”
Increased physician stress. Public-facing ratings and comments can be detrimental to physician well-being. “I know clinicians who’ve gotten negative reviews, either through our Press-Ganey survey or on social media, and those reviews had a significant impact on their mental health,” Dr. Gantwerker said. “The personalization of that feedback can be extremely detrimental, and that’s on top of all the other pressures that people are experiencing. The rates of suicide and mental health problems amongst healthcare professionals are skyrocketing, and we need to understand the role that reviews play in increasing pressure.”
Gaming the system. Given that patient satisfaction scores and reviews affect physicians’ (and institutions’) reputations and income, there’s significant temptation to artificially inflate performance indicators. It’s easy to find artificial intelligence (AI) review generators online, which is likely why many product review sites now include reviews that sound startlingly similar. Dr. Gantwerker noted that the rapid advancement of AI tools “may change the entire landscape” of patient review sites.
“AI can write reviews in a second. Natural language models can even create personas and modify the language, so the reviews seem like they’re from new patients,” Dr. Gantwerker said. “Imagine you’re a facial plastic surgeon in a very competitive market. It may not be beyond people to take drastic measures to get referrals, and that’s a problem.”
Review sites may use AI detection tools to intercept and eliminate artificially generated comments and ratings, but Dr. Citardi predicted there will “be a bit of an arms race because as the AI gets better, the defenses against it will scale.”
Perhaps more damagingly, evidence suggests that providers who prioritize patient requests over evidence-based medicine may garner higher patient satisfaction scores, so physicians under pressure may be more likely to prescribe unnecessary but patient-requested antibiotics, for instance (Laryngoscope. 2021;131:2204–2210). In a 2022 JAMA article, Kevin Shulman, MD, professor of medicine at the Stanford University School of Medicine, noted that people may “engineer efforts to boost measured performance … often with exacting focus on factors wholly insignificant to physiologic health” when patient satisfaction scores are linked to pay (2022;328:2209).
The Positives of Patient Feedback
Of course, patient perceptions of clinical encounters are important, and evidence shows that interpretation of patient experience data is “extremely useful and practical on a systems level” (N Engl J Med. 2019;380:801–803). Sharing patient feedback has numerous benefits.
Identifies areas for improvement. Obsessing over patient satisfaction scores and feedback isn’t helpful, but periodically reviewing patient feedback can point out possible areas of improvement. “If you see a trend, then maybe there’s a problem,” Dr. Micco said. “Maybe I’ve been worried too much about getting through clinic, for instance, and not spending enough time with patients.”
At Henry Ford Health, providers who persistently receive low scores may get an opportunity to work with patient experience specialists who can help physicians improve their interactions. “They may deconstruct interactions with the physician,” Dr. Yaremchuk said. “Did you sit down when you were talking to the patient? Did you make eye contact or were you looking at the computer screen the whole time? Did you finish the visit by asking, ‘Is there anything else I can do for you today?’”
Physicians receive positive feedback. Physician–patient interactions are usually problem focused. Even patients who are doing well will “focus on the 5% of residual symptoms they have,” Dr. Bleier said, because visits are a time to address problems. Patient satisfaction surveys give patients a chance to express their appreciation and physicians an opportunity to enjoy positive recognition.
Striving for patient satisfaction may improve clinical care. “If you want patients to participate in their care, they have to believe that you’re trying to do the best for them,” Dr. Yaremchuk said. Taking the time to attentively engage patients is a crucial first step to improving their health.
Effective communication skills are integral to both excellent patient satisfaction scores and excellent clinical outcomes. “A patient–doctor interaction is a contract, of sorts. How can my patient sign that contract if I don’t educate him or her well enough?” Dr. Micco said. “So, my job is to sit there, let them know what’s going on, try to allay their fears, give them options that they understand, and answer their questions so they can make a decision. We need someone to evaluate us, and it’s the patients.”
Jennifer Fink is a freelance medical writer based in Wisconsin.