Radiation Oncologist Perceptions and Utilization of Digital Patient Assessment Platforms.

Applied radiation oncology Pub Date : 2020-09-01
Peter Zaki, Ganesh Shenoy, Jiangtao Gou, Vijay Raj, Krisha Howell
{"title":"Radiation Oncologist Perceptions and Utilization of Digital Patient Assessment Platforms.","authors":"Peter Zaki,&nbsp;Ganesh Shenoy,&nbsp;Jiangtao Gou,&nbsp;Vijay Raj,&nbsp;Krisha Howell","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient engagement is increasing in the presence of digital patient assessment platforms, or physician rating websites. Despite this rapid growth, data remains insufficient regarding how these evaluations impact radiation oncologists.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The purpose of this study was to assess radiation oncologists worldwide on their awareness and noted effects of digital patient assessment platforms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An electronic survey was delivered to 6,199 members of the American Society of Radiation Oncology. Subjects were radiation oncologists practicing throughout the world. The survey consisted of 14 questions focused on demographics, practice details, patient volume, institutional utilization of patient reviews, and perceptions of radiation oncologists on health care reviews provided by patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 447 responses from practicing radiation oncologists in total, 321 (72%) of which are in the US. Most respondents (228; 51%) either agreed or strongly agreed that patients consider online reviews when deciding which physician to visit. Of all respondents, 188 (42%) reported that their institution checks their online feedback, whereas 157 (36%) and 99 (22%) respectively reported not knowing, or to their knowledge their institution does not check their online feedback. Respondents who saw more than the average number of consults per week were significantly more likely to receive negative feedback (<i>P</i> = 0.005). Forty-five percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that online virtual assessment tools contribute to physician burnout. Respondents (100; 22%) who received inappropriate or misdirected feedback were significantly more likely to report that virtual reviews contribute to burnout (<i>P</i> = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Radiation oncologists need to be aware that self-reported patient assessments are a data point in the quality of a physician and health care establishment. To best ensure appropriate feedback of a physician's capabilities as a doctor, leadership and employee alignment for patient experience are now more important than ever.</p>","PeriodicalId":72265,"journal":{"name":"Applied radiation oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7536100/pdf/nihms-1631422.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied radiation oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Patient engagement is increasing in the presence of digital patient assessment platforms, or physician rating websites. Despite this rapid growth, data remains insufficient regarding how these evaluations impact radiation oncologists.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess radiation oncologists worldwide on their awareness and noted effects of digital patient assessment platforms.

Methods: An electronic survey was delivered to 6,199 members of the American Society of Radiation Oncology. Subjects were radiation oncologists practicing throughout the world. The survey consisted of 14 questions focused on demographics, practice details, patient volume, institutional utilization of patient reviews, and perceptions of radiation oncologists on health care reviews provided by patients.

Results: There were 447 responses from practicing radiation oncologists in total, 321 (72%) of which are in the US. Most respondents (228; 51%) either agreed or strongly agreed that patients consider online reviews when deciding which physician to visit. Of all respondents, 188 (42%) reported that their institution checks their online feedback, whereas 157 (36%) and 99 (22%) respectively reported not knowing, or to their knowledge their institution does not check their online feedback. Respondents who saw more than the average number of consults per week were significantly more likely to receive negative feedback (P = 0.005). Forty-five percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that online virtual assessment tools contribute to physician burnout. Respondents (100; 22%) who received inappropriate or misdirected feedback were significantly more likely to report that virtual reviews contribute to burnout (P = 0.001).

Conclusions: Radiation oncologists need to be aware that self-reported patient assessments are a data point in the quality of a physician and health care establishment. To best ensure appropriate feedback of a physician's capabilities as a doctor, leadership and employee alignment for patient experience are now more important than ever.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
放射肿瘤学家对数字患者评估平台的认知和利用。
背景:在数字患者评估平台或医生评级网站的存在下,患者参与度正在增加。尽管这种快速增长,关于这些评估如何影响放射肿瘤学家的数据仍然不足。目的:本研究的目的是评估全球放射肿瘤学家对数字患者评估平台的认识和注意效果。方法:对6199名美国放射肿瘤学会会员进行电子调查。研究对象是世界各地执业的放射肿瘤学家。调查包括14个问题,重点是人口统计、实践细节、患者数量、机构对患者评价的利用以及放射肿瘤学家对患者提供的医疗评价的看法。结果:共有447份来自执业放射肿瘤学家的回复,其中321份(72%)来自美国。大多数受访者(228人;51%)同意或非常同意患者在决定去看哪位医生时会考虑在线评论。在所有受访者中,188人(42%)表示他们的机构检查了他们的在线反馈,而157人(36%)和99人(22%)分别表示不知道,或者据他们所知,他们的机构没有检查他们的在线反馈。每周咨询次数超过平均次数的受访者更有可能收到负面反馈(P = 0.005)。45%的受访者同意或强烈同意在线虚拟评估工具会导致医生倦怠。受访者(100;22%)收到不恰当或误导反馈的人更有可能报告虚拟评估导致倦怠(P = 0.001)。结论:放射肿瘤学家需要意识到,自我报告的患者评估是医生和卫生保健机构质量的一个数据点。为了最好地确保医生作为医生的能力得到适当的反馈,领导和员工对患者体验的一致性现在比以往任何时候都更加重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Milestones and Master Plans Opportunities Are Knocking, Are You Listening? Whole-Lung IMRT in Children and Adults With Synovial Sarcoma and Lung Metastases: Single-Institution Prospective Clinical Trial Evaluating the Utility of Webinars on the Radiation Oncology Residency Application Process in the COVID-19 Era A Case of Vision Loss From Radiation-Induced Optic Neuropathy Resulting in Charles Bonnet Syndrome
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1