I tend to agree with this article in the sense that online reviews are an issue. A patient cannot evaluate their care using the criterion one would use for other services. This growing trend is a reflection of the privatization all aspects of our society. Everything is starting to be evaluated from a consumer-centric mind and if a physician is "bad" then I will choose to see another. The Internet provides a venue in which all are free to critique everything they come across and yet it becomes difficult to distinguish good from bad, true from false. A doctor's obligation is to treat their patients the best way possible and it is not always the quick fix patients are looking for. Additionally, health care is a two-way relationship, the physician is a facilitator and the patient has the responsibility to follow care regimens and be active in the process. That being said, I do believe that there is merit in reviewing the quality of care of your provider, however, I would suggest an in-clinic review. Provide the patient with a constructive outlet to express what they liked and disliked about their physician and care. In this way, the physician can evaluate and assess this reflection and make appropriate changes that would benefit all parties. An online review is often inflammatory and without the physician unable to respond, very little and inefficient change comes from it.
I agree with Alex's last statement in his response. Since physicians cannot respond to negative comments on the internet, patients have the last say. I think the internet has hindered the doctor-patient relationship in a way that will only continue to get worse because physicians are unable to defend themselves. On a side note, I have read about family practice physicians being able to treat patients through the internet. The patients are able to text and video chat their doctor, and therefore, receive more one-on-one care than they would with a doctor face-to-face.
I tend to agree with this article in the sense that online reviews are an issue. A patient cannot evaluate their care using the criterion one would use for other services. This growing trend is a reflection of the privatization all aspects of our society. Everything is starting to be evaluated from a consumer-centric mind and if a physician is "bad" then I will choose to see another. The Internet provides a venue in which all are free to critique everything they come across and yet it becomes difficult to distinguish good from bad, true from false. A doctor's obligation is to treat their patients the best way possible and it is not always the quick fix patients are looking for. Additionally, health care is a two-way relationship, the physician is a facilitator and the patient has the responsibility to follow care regimens and be active in the process. That being said, I do believe that there is merit in reviewing the quality of care of your provider, however, I would suggest an in-clinic review. Provide the patient with a constructive outlet to express what they liked and disliked about their physician and care. In this way, the physician can evaluate and assess this reflection and make appropriate changes that would benefit all parties. An online review is often inflammatory and without the physician unable to respond, very little and inefficient change comes from it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Alex's last statement in his response. Since physicians cannot respond to negative comments on the internet, patients have the last say. I think the internet has hindered the doctor-patient relationship in a way that will only continue to get worse because physicians are unable to defend themselves. On a side note, I have read about family practice physicians being able to treat patients through the internet. The patients are able to text and video chat their doctor, and therefore, receive more one-on-one care than they would with a doctor face-to-face.
ReplyDelete