JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

The Internet has become a popular platform for patients to obtain information and review the providers they interact with. However, little is known on the digital footprint of vascular surgeons and their interactivity with patients on social media.

Objective:

This study aims to understand the activity of academic vascular surgeons on physician rating websites.

Methods:

Information on attending vascular surgeons affiliated with vascular residency or fellowships in the Southern Association for Vascular Surgery was collected from public sources. A listing of websites containing physician rating was obtained via literature review and google search. Open access websites that contain either qualitative or quantitative evaluation 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.

Results:

A total of 6238 quantitative and 967 qualitative reviews were written for 287 physicians (236 males, 82%) across 16 websites that met inclusion criteria out of 62 websites screened. Surgeons in the SAVS region had a median of 8 (interquartile range; 7-10) profiles across 16 websites with only one surgeon having no web presence on any sites. The median number of quantitative ratings for each physician was 17 (interquartile range; 6-34, range; 1-137) and the median number of narrative reviews was 3 (interquartile range; 2-6, range; 1-28). Vitals, WebMD and Healthgrades were the only three websites where over a quarter of the physicians were rated, and those rated had more than 5 ratings on average. The median score for quantitative reviews was 4.4 (interquartile range; 4.0-4.9). Most narrative reviews (78.4%, 758/967) were positive, but 20.2% were considered negative, only 1.4% were considered equivocal. No statistical difference was found in the number of quantitative reviews or overall average score in physicians with versus without social media profiles.

Conclusions:

Vascular representation on physician rating websites is varied with the majority of vascular surgeons only represented on the top half of the physician rating websites. The number of quantitative and qualitative reviews are low. No surgeons responded to reviews. The activity of vascular surgeons in this area of social media is low and reflects a small digital footprint that patients can reach and review.