Autonomic medical practice viewed through the lens of physician-rating websites.

PURPOSE: To survey online patient ratings of physicians practicing autonomic medicine.

METHODS

Online patient review scores of US physician members of the American Autonomic Society were compared to scores of US physicians in general and to indices of professional expertise.

RESULTS

The 68 autonomic physicians who had been rated scored 3.80 ± 0.82 on a composite five-star scale, in which 5 was the most favorable score, as compared to 3.84 ± 0.98 for all US physicians (no significant difference, p = 0.8). Scores correlated inversely with autonomic physicians' number of scientific publications (p = 0.01), h-index (p = 0.01), and m-index (p = 0.0004). Scores of diplomates of the United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties certified in autonomic disorders or who were ranked in the top 1% of US physicians by Castle Connolly had scores comparable to those of other autonomic physicians. Scores did not correlate with physician gender, number of reviews, or years in practice.

CONCLUSION

A quality patient experience, accurate diagnosis, and appropriate treatment are goals shared by patients and autonomic specialists. In this study, patient reviews of autonomic physicians were comparable to those of physicians across specialties. Metrics of greater autonomic expertise were associated with equal or lower patient satisfaction scores. In conclusion, compiled subjective reviews are a useful but incomplete indicator of autonomic physician quality and expertise. An ideal profile would combine clinical and nonclinical indicators of professional competence. Reliable information is needed to empower autonomic patients to make truly informed healthcare choices.