Categorization of Patient Reviews in a Hematology Clinic

Abstract

Introduction: Patient reviews of physicians and hospitals are frequently collected after patient visits. This information is used in a multitude of ways, including ranking provider services, national hospital rankings, informing other patients of expectations, hospital improvements, etc. Often, the ranking of a physician is reflective of the entire patient experience rather than the provider as an individual. We opted to look at recent rankings from our outpatient hematology department to help determine where patients were identifying specific issues. Methods: Using 174 patient comments as collected by NRC Health ® on an outpatient hematology unit focused on both malignant and benign hematology in a hybrid academic/community practice in Orlando Florida, we divided patient comments into different sections. These included comments directed toward:Individual providerClinic or front office staffTime based concerns (time to get roomed to see physician, time for check out, time for results of tests, etc.)Financial concernsScheduling concernsConcerns related to emergency rooms or inpatient saysOther (medication refills, intake paperwork, parking issues) Every patient comment for reviews that were less than "five stars" were reviewed and categorized into the above categories. If telehealth was used, we separately looked at comments related to these visits. Results: Of 174 returned comments, there were 46 (26%) returned comments were less than "five stars". The concerns were directed toward:Individual provider: 4 timesHospital staff: 11 timesTime based concerns: 14 timesFinancial concerns: 2 timesScheduling concerns: 5 timesConcerns related to emergency rooms or inpatient says: 4 timesOther: 6 times When a visit was telehealth based, 14/15 patients left a positive review. The one negative review was a patient having a difficult time with the specific virtual platform used for the visit. Conclusion: Of 174 patient surveys being returned, 46 left a comment identifying a grievance or a point for improvement. Rarely (8%) was the individual provider the point of concern. Much more often, time based concerns or staff related concerns were highlighted as areas for improvement. When telehealth was used, these problems were never mentioned, perhaps highlighting a benefit for these platforms.