Abstract
BackgroundThe internet has become a popular platform for patients to obtain information and to review the health care providers they interact with. However, little is known about the digital footprint of vascular surgeons and their interactions with patients on social media.ObjectiveThis study aims to understand the activity of academic vascular surgeons on physician rating websites.MethodsInformation on attending vascular surgeons affiliated with vascular residency or with fellowships in the Southern Association for Vascular Surgery (SAVS) was collected from public sources. A listing of websites containing physician ratings was obtained via literature reviews and Google search. Open access websites with either qualitative or quantitative evaluations of vascular surgeons were included. Closed access websites were excluded. Ranking scores from each website were converted to a standard 5-point scale for comparison.ResultsA total of 6238 quantitative and 967 qualitative reviews were written for 287 physicians (236 males, 82.2%) across 16 websites that met the inclusion criteria out of the 62 websites screened. The surgeons affiliated with the integrated vascular residency and vascular fellowship programs in SAVS had a median of 8 (IQR 7-10) profiles across 16 websites, with only 1 surgeon having no web presence in any of the websites. The median number of quantitative ratings for each physician was 17 (IQR 6-34, range 1-137) and the median number of narrative reviews was 3 (IQR 2-6, range 1-28). Vitals, WebMD, and Healthgrades were the only 3 websites where over a quarter of the physicians were rated, and those rated had more than 5 ratings on average. The median score for the quantitative reviews was 4.4 (IQR 4.0-4.9). Most narrative reviews (758/967, 78.4%) were positive, but 20.2% (195/967) were considered negative; only 1.4% (14/967) were considered equivocal. No statistical difference was found in the number of quantitative reviews or in the overall average score in the physician ratings between physicians with social media profiles and those without social media profiles (departmental social media profile: median 23 vs 15, respectively, P=.22; personal social media profile: median 19 vs 14, respectively, P=.08).ConclusionsThe representation of vascular surgeons on physician rating websites is varied, with the majority of the vascular surgeons represented only in half of the physician rating websites The number of quantitative and qualitative reviews for academic vascular surgeons is low. No vascular surgeon responded to any of the reviews. The activity of vascular surgeons in this area of social media is low and reflects only a small digital footprint that patients can reach and review.
Highlights
Social media resources continue to be used by commercial and nonprofit organizations for social marketing because of the advantages of access to a large number of consumers, presence of transparency, the wide global reach, the ability to boost web page traffic, and the ability to promote the brand name [1]
Surveys have indicated that the insurance accepted, referrals from primary care physicians, and reputation are important in the selection of physicians, 65% of the physician rating website users have been shown to choose a physician after viewing positive reviews on websites, and 52% of the physician rating website users have avoided providers owing to the negative reviews shown on the websites [4,5]
This study examines data in the public domain and does not contain Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) information or interactions with individuals; it is exempt from institutional review board approval or consent
Summary
Social media resources continue to be used by commercial and nonprofit organizations for social marketing because of the advantages of access to a large number of consumers, presence of transparency, the wide global reach, the ability to boost web page traffic, and the ability to promote the brand name [1]. With reference to health care, social media tools play an essential role in reputation management, public outreach, health promotion, and patient education [2]. An additional tool is the provision of quantitative and qualitative ratings of physician performance on physician rating websites that can be shared publicly. Physician rating websites display valuable information for a consumer regarding a physician’s practice, including the physician’s area of expertise, office location, office hours, insurance accepted, in addition to quantitative and qualitative reviews from past consumers. The internet has become a popular platform for patients to obtain information and to review the health care providers they interact with. Little is known about the digital footprint of vascular surgeons and their interactions with patients on social media
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
