How Are Patients Reviewing Spine Surgeons Online? A Sentiment Analysis of Physician Review Website Written Comments

Overview

Journal Global Spine J

Publisher Sage Publications

Date 2022 Jan 27

PMID 35085039

Authors

Justin E Tang

Varun Arvind

Calista Dominy

Christopher A White

Samuel K Cho

Jun S Kim

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Study Design: A Sentiment Analysis of online reviews of spine surgeons.

Objectives: Physician review websites have significant impact on a patient's provider selection. Written reviews are subjective, but sentiment analysis through machine learning can quantitatively analyze these reviews. This study analyzes online written reviews of spine surgeons and reports biases associated with demographic factors and trends in words utilized.

Methods: Online written and star-reviews of spine surgeons were obtained from healthgrades.com. A sentiment analysis package was used to analyze the written reviews. The relationship of demographic variables to these scores was analyzed with t-tests and word and bigram frequency analyses were performed. Additionally, a multiple regression analysis was performed on key terms.

Results: 8357 reviews of 480 surgeons were analyzed. There was a significant difference between the means of sentiment analysis scores and star scores for both gender and age. Younger, male surgeons were rated more highly on average ( < .01). Word frequency analysis indicated that behavioral factors and pain were the main contributing factors to both the best and worst reviewed surgeons. Additionally, several clinically relevant words, when included in a review, affected the odds of a positive review.

Conclusions: The best reviews laud surgeons for their ability to manage pain and for exhibiting positive bedside manner. However, the worst reviews primarily focus on pain and its management, as exhibited by the frequency and multivariate analysis. Pain is a clear contributing factor to reviews, thus emphasizing the importance of establishing proper pain expectations prior to any intervention.

Citing Articles

Perspectives surrounding robotic total hip arthroplasty: a cross-sectional analysis using natural language processing.

Levett J, Elkaim L, Zukor D, Huk O, Antoniou J Can J Surg. 2025; 68(1):E10-E16.

PMID: 39753324 PMC: 11684921. DOI: 10.1503/cjs.010423.

Predicting patients' sentiments about medications using artificial intelligence techniques.

Sorayaie Azar A, Babaei Rikan S, Naemi A, Bagherzadeh Mohasefi J, Wiil U Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):31928.

PMID: 39738528 PMC: 11685940. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-83222-9.

A sentiment analysis on online psychiatrist reviews to identify clinical attributes of psychiatrists that shape the therapeutic alliance.

Park S, Cheng C, Buehler N, Sanford T, Torrey W Front Psychiatry. 2023; 14:1174154.

PMID: 37398580 PMC: 10313228. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1174154.

Physician Review Websites: Understanding Patient Satisfaction with Ophthalmologists Using Natural Language Processing.

Jo J, Cheng C, Ying S, Chelnis J J Ophthalmol. 2023; 2023:4762460.

PMID: 36938345 PMC: 10017208. DOI: 10.1155/2023/4762460.

References

Kirkpatrick W, Abboudi J, Kim N, Medina J, Maltenfort M, Seigerman D . An Assessment of Online Reviews of Hand Surgeons. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2017; 5(3):139-144. PMC: 5466857. View

Lehrich B, Goshtasbi K, Brown N, Shahrestani S, Lien B, Ransom S . Predictors of Patient Satisfaction in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review. World Neurosurg. 2020; 146:e1160-e1170. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.11.125. View

Velasco B, Chien B, Kwon J, Miller C . Online Ratings and Reviews of American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Surgeons. Foot Ankle Spec. 2019; 13(1):43-49. DOI: 10.1177/1938640019832363. View

Bakhsh W, Mesfin A . Online ratings of orthopedic surgeons: analysis of 2185 reviews. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2014; 43(8):359-63. View

Lands V, Malige A, Nwachuku C, Matullo K . The Effect of an Orthopedic Hand Surgeon's Attire on Patient Confidence and Trust. Hand (N Y). 2018; 14(5):675-683. PMC: 6759972. DOI: 10.1177/1558944717750918. View

Daniulaityte R, Chen L, Lamy F, Carlson R, Thirunarayan K, Sheth A . "When 'Bad' is 'Good'": Identifying Personal Communication and Sentiment in Drug-Related Tweets. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2016; 2(2):e162. PMC: 5099500. DOI: 10.2196/publichealth.6327. View

Hautala G, Comadoll S, Raffetto M, Ducas G, Jacobs C, Aneja A . Most orthopaedic trauma patients are using the internet, but do you know where they're going?. Injury. 2021; 52(11):3299-3303. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2021.02.029. View

Hanauer D, Zheng K, Singer D, Gebremariam A, Davis M . Public awareness, perception, and use of online physician rating sites. JAMA. 2014; 311(7):734-5. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2013.283194. View

Grotle M, Smastuen M, Fjeld O, Grovle L, Helgeland J, Storheim K . Lumbar spine surgery across 15 years: trends, complications and reoperations in a longitudinal observational study from Norway. BMJ Open. 2019; 9(8):e028743. PMC: 6688683. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028743. View

10.

Agarwal A, Mahoney K, Lanza A, Klinger E, Asch D, Fausti N . Online Ratings of the Patient Experience: Emergency Departments Versus Urgent Care Centers. Ann Emerg Med. 2018; 73(6):631-638. DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2018.09.029. View

11.

Zakare-Fagbamila R, Park C, Dickson W, Cheng T, Gottfried O . The true penalty of the waiting room: the role of wait time in patient satisfaction in a busy spine practice. J Neurosurg Spine. 2020; 33(1):95-105. DOI: 10.3171/2019.12.SPINE191257. View

12.

Donnally C, McCormick J, Li D, Maguire J, Barker G, Rush A . How do physician demographics, training, social media usage, online presence, and wait times influence online physician review scores for spine surgeons?. J Neurosurg Spine. 2018; 30(2):279-288. DOI: 10.3171/2018.8.SPINE18553. View

13.

Soroceanu A, Ching A, Abdu W, McGuire K . Relationship between preoperative expectations, satisfaction, and functional outcomes in patients undergoing lumbar and cervical spine surgery: a multicenter study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011; 37(2):E103-8. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182245c1f. View

14.

Patel P, Canseco J, Houlihan N, Gabay A, Grasso G, Vaccaro A . Overview of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery. World Neurosurg. 2020; 142:43-56. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.06.043. View

15.

Donnally 3rd C, McCormick J, Pastore M, Sama A, Schiller N, Li D . Social Media Presence Correlated with Improved Online Review Scores for Spine Surgeons. World Neurosurg. 2020; 141:e18-e25. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.04.045. View

16.

Li S, Lee-Won R, McKnight J . Effects of Online Physician Reviews and Physician Gender on Perceptions of Physician Skills and Primary Care Physician (PCP) Selection. Health Commun. 2018; 34(11):1250-1258. DOI: 10.1080/10410236.2018.1475192. View

17.

Haglin J, Eltorai A, Kalagara S, Kingrey B, Durand W, Aidlen J . Patient-Rated Trust of Spine Surgeons: Influencing Factors. Global Spine J. 2018; 8(7):728-732. PMC: 6232710. DOI: 10.1177/2192568218767385. View

18.

Burrus M, Werner B, Starman J, Kurkis G, Pierre J, Diduch D . Patient Perceptions and Current Trends in Internet Use by Orthopedic Outpatients. HSS J. 2017; 13(3):271-275. PMC: 5617824. DOI: 10.1007/s11420-017-9568-2. View

19.

Kobayashi K, Ando K, Nishida Y, Ishiguro N, Imagama S . Epidemiological trends in spine surgery over 10 years in a multicenter database. Eur Spine J. 2018; 27(8):1698-1703. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-018-5513-4. View

20.

Kalagara S, Eltorai A, DePasse J, Daniels A . Predictive factors of positive online patient ratings of spine surgeons. Spine J. 2018; 19(1):182-185. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2018.07.024. View