Increase in patient load linked to poorer urologist ratings

Increase in patient load linked to poorer urologist ratings

(HealthDay)—Academic urologists have higher mean weighted ratings than their nonacademic peers, and those with increased patient load have poorer ratings, according to a research letter published online March 21 in JAMA Surgery.

Gregory P. Murphy, M.D., from Washington University in St. Louis, and colleagues conducted a retrospective review of Medicare data on the 665 urologists in California in 2014. The number of reviews and mean score were obtained from four websites; urologists' weighted ratings were compared and stratified by the number of seen, Medicare services billed, sex, and practice setting.

The researchers found that the mean total number of reviews in the four websites combined was 10, and at least one rating was found for 651 urologists. The mean weighted ratings were 4.2 and 3.7 for academic urologists and their nonacademic peers, respectively. The mean weighted ratings were similar for female and male urologists (3.9 versus 3.8). There was a significant trend toward higher ratings for urologists who saw fewer Medicare patients. In multivariable analyses, academic physicians had higher scores, while poorer ratings were seen for an increase in Medicare patient load. Ratings were lowered by 0.04 for every 100 patients seen. In univariable analysis, more services billed was associated with lower ratings; this was not significant in a multivariable model.

"More research is needed to determine what factors lead to more satisfied patients," the authors write.

Explore further

Physician review websites rely on few patient reviews

More information: Abstract/Full Text (subscription or payment may be required)
Journal information: JAMA Surgery

Copyright © 2018 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Citation: Increase in patient load linked to poorer urologist ratings (2018, March 23) retrieved 6 March 2021 from
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

Feedback to editors

User comments