June 2020
Volume 61, Issue 7
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2020
Paper Versus Electronic Solicitation for Online Ratings of Retinal Physicians
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Allison Wuller
    Integrative Biology, University of Illinois Urbana Champaign, Belleville, Illinois, United States
    Retina, Retina Associates of Cleveland Inc., Beachwood, Ohio, United States
  • David G Miller
    Retina, Retina Associates of Cleveland Inc., Beachwood, Ohio, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Allison Wuller, None; David Miller, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2020, Vol.61, 3083. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Allison Wuller, David G Miller; Paper Versus Electronic Solicitation for Online Ratings of Retinal Physicians. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2020;61(7):3083.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : To compare the monthly percentage of patients performing online ratings of retinal physicians when prompted by paper solicitation versus electronic solicitation for a private retinal practice.

Methods : IRB approval was determined to not be required for this study. The number of patient visits were tabulated from the practice management system for each of 3 offices on a monthly basis for an initial period (IP) of 6 months (paper solicitation for all offices) and second period (SP) of 12 months (electronic solicitation for one office only). We also recorded the monthly number of google online physician reviews for each of 3 offices with the same physicians for the IP and SP. The number of monthly reviews was divided by the number of patient visits to convert it to the percentage of patients who performed an online review to make comparisons across different offices and times with different patient volume. The monthly percentage of patients who performed an online review were compared within each office between IP versus SP using a paired two tail T test for each office. The percent of monthly reviews was also compared in the SP between the one office with electronic solicitation (ES), and the two offices with paper solicitation (PS1 and PS2), using a paired two tail T test.

Results : The average number of monthly visits for the 3 offices in the IP were 564 (ES), 539 (PS1) and 1518 (PS2). The average number of monthly visits for 3 offices in the SP were 660 (ES), 577 (PS1), and 1520 (PS2). The monthly average percent of patients who gave an online review for 3 offices in the IP were 0% (ES), 0.0304% (PS1), and 0% (PS2), and in the SP were 0.980% (ES), 0.0428% (PS1), 0% (PS2), with a significant change seen only for ES (P<.01). The difference between the monthly percent of patients who performed an online review between the ES vs PS1 and ES vs PS2 in the SP was significant for both comparisons (p<0.01).

Conclusions : Electronic solicitation appears to provide a significant increase in online ratings when compared to paper solicitation in the same office as well as when compared to paper solicitation in other offices.

This is a 2020 ARVO Annual Meeting abstract.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×