美国耳鼻喉科医生在线患者评分不佳:患者在说什么?

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q3 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
Ent-Ear Nose & Throat Journal Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-01-05 DOI:10.1177/01455613221150146
Grace M Spiro, Connor S Sommerfeld, Kevin Fung, Alexandra E Quimby, Kristina H Pulkki, Mélyssa Fortin, Lily Hp Nguyen
{"title":"美国耳鼻喉科医生在线患者评分不佳:患者在说什么?","authors":"Grace M Spiro, Connor S Sommerfeld, Kevin Fung, Alexandra E Quimby, Kristina H Pulkki, Mélyssa Fortin, Lily Hp Nguyen","doi":"10.1177/01455613221150146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectivesOnline patient forums have become a platform for patient education and advocacy in many areas of medicine. The anonymity provided by such forums may encourage honest, candid responses. Using patient online reviews, this study sought to explore themes that arose from negatively perceived care interactions with American otolaryngologists using the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competency framework.Study DesignQualitative thematic analysis.MethodsThrough an iterative multistep process, a qualitative thematic analysis was conducted on negative reviews (defined as ratings of two or less out of five) of all American otolaryngologists found on a popular online physician-rating website (RateMDs.com).ResultsA systematic search through the RateMDs website revealed 2950 separate comments of negative reviews. Of these negative reviews, 350 were randomly selected for thematic analysis. The predominant themes that emerged aligned closely with the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competencies, in particularly with professionalism and interprofessional skills and communication.ConclusionsThe negative reviews of American otolaryngologists revealed a number of areas where improvements could be made to quality of care. Patients value evidence-based medicine delivered by compassionate and respectful physicians. Isolating and aligning predominant themes within the ACGME framework proved a productive method to collect and organize pertinent patient feedback and integrate teaching into the post-graduate training and continuing professional development in order to avoid such negatively perceived interactions in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":51041,"journal":{"name":"Ent-Ear Nose & Throat Journal","volume":" ","pages":"NP685-NP691"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Poor Online Patient Ratings of Otolaryngologists in the United States: What are Patients Saying?\",\"authors\":\"Grace M Spiro, Connor S Sommerfeld, Kevin Fung, Alexandra E Quimby, Kristina H Pulkki, Mélyssa Fortin, Lily Hp Nguyen\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01455613221150146\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>ObjectivesOnline patient forums have become a platform for patient education and advocacy in many areas of medicine. The anonymity provided by such forums may encourage honest, candid responses. Using patient online reviews, this study sought to explore themes that arose from negatively perceived care interactions with American otolaryngologists using the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competency framework.Study DesignQualitative thematic analysis.MethodsThrough an iterative multistep process, a qualitative thematic analysis was conducted on negative reviews (defined as ratings of two or less out of five) of all American otolaryngologists found on a popular online physician-rating website (RateMDs.com).ResultsA systematic search through the RateMDs website revealed 2950 separate comments of negative reviews. Of these negative reviews, 350 were randomly selected for thematic analysis. The predominant themes that emerged aligned closely with the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competencies, in particularly with professionalism and interprofessional skills and communication.ConclusionsThe negative reviews of American otolaryngologists revealed a number of areas where improvements could be made to quality of care. Patients value evidence-based medicine delivered by compassionate and respectful physicians. Isolating and aligning predominant themes within the ACGME framework proved a productive method to collect and organize pertinent patient feedback and integrate teaching into the post-graduate training and continuing professional development in order to avoid such negatively perceived interactions in the future.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51041,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ent-Ear Nose & Throat Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"NP685-NP691\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ent-Ear Nose & Throat Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01455613221150146\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ent-Ear Nose & Throat Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01455613221150146","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:在许多医学领域,在线患者论坛已成为患者教育和宣传的平台。此类论坛提供的匿名性可能会鼓励患者做出诚实、坦率的回答。本研究试图利用患者的在线评论,在美国毕业医学教育认证委员会(ACGME)的能力框架内,探讨与美国耳鼻喉科医生的负面护理互动中产生的主题:研究设计:定性专题分析:通过一个多步骤的迭代过程,对流行的在线医生评级网站(RateMDs.com)上所有美国耳鼻喉科医生的负面评论(定义为满分 5 分中 2 分或以下的评分)进行了定性专题分析:通过对 RateMDs 网站进行系统搜索,发现了 2950 条不同的负面评论。在这些负面评论中,随机抽取了 350 条进行主题分析。出现的主要专题与毕业医学教育认证委员会(ACGME)的能力密切相关,尤其是专业精神、跨专业技能和沟通:结论:对美国耳鼻喉科医生的负面评价揭示了一些可以提高医疗质量的领域。患者重视由富有同情心和尊重患者的医生提供的循证医学。事实证明,在 ACGME 框架内分离和调整主要主题是一种卓有成效的方法,可用于收集和整理相关的患者反馈意见,并将教学融入研究生培训和持续职业发展中,以避免今后出现此类负面评价。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Poor Online Patient Ratings of Otolaryngologists in the United States: What are Patients Saying?

ObjectivesOnline patient forums have become a platform for patient education and advocacy in many areas of medicine. The anonymity provided by such forums may encourage honest, candid responses. Using patient online reviews, this study sought to explore themes that arose from negatively perceived care interactions with American otolaryngologists using the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competency framework.Study DesignQualitative thematic analysis.MethodsThrough an iterative multistep process, a qualitative thematic analysis was conducted on negative reviews (defined as ratings of two or less out of five) of all American otolaryngologists found on a popular online physician-rating website (RateMDs.com).ResultsA systematic search through the RateMDs website revealed 2950 separate comments of negative reviews. Of these negative reviews, 350 were randomly selected for thematic analysis. The predominant themes that emerged aligned closely with the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competencies, in particularly with professionalism and interprofessional skills and communication.ConclusionsThe negative reviews of American otolaryngologists revealed a number of areas where improvements could be made to quality of care. Patients value evidence-based medicine delivered by compassionate and respectful physicians. Isolating and aligning predominant themes within the ACGME framework proved a productive method to collect and organize pertinent patient feedback and integrate teaching into the post-graduate training and continuing professional development in order to avoid such negatively perceived interactions in the future.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ent-Ear Nose & Throat Journal
Ent-Ear Nose & Throat Journal 医学-耳鼻喉科学
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
385
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Ear, Nose & Throat Journal provides practical, peer-reviewed original clinical articles, highlighting scientific research relevant to clinical care, and case reports that describe unusual entities or innovative approaches to treatment and case management. ENT Journal utilizes multiple channels to deliver authoritative and timely content that informs, engages, and shapes the industry now and into the future.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信