Publications

BACKGROUND

Doctor rating websites are a burgeoning trend, yet little is known about their content.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the content of Internet reviews about primary care physicians.

DESIGN

Qualitative content analysis of 712 online reviews from two rating websites. We purposively sampled reviews of 445 primary care doctors (internists and family practitioners) from four geographically dispersed U.S. urban locations. We report the major themes, and because this is a large sample, the frequencies of domains within our coding scheme.

RESULTS

Most reviews (63%) were positive, recommending the physician. We found a major distinction between global reviews, "Dr. B is a great doctor." vs. specific descriptions which included interpersonal manner, "She always listens to what I have to say and answers all my questions."; technical competence "No matter who she has recommended re: MD specialists, this MD has done everything right."; and/or systems issues such as appointment and telephone access. Among specific reviews, interpersonal manner "Dr. A is so compassionate." and technical competence "He is knowledgeable, will research your case before giving you advice." comments tended to be more positive (69% and 80%, respectively), whereas systems-issues comments "Staff is so-so, less professional than should be…" were more mixed (60% positive, 40% negative).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of Internet reviews of primary care physicians are positive in nature. Our findings reaffirm that the care encounter extends beyond the patient-physician dyad; staff, access, and convenience all affect patient's reviews of physicians. In addition, negative interpersonal reviews underscore the importance of well-perceived bedside manner for a successful patient-physician interaction.

BACKGROUND

Despite high rates of patient satisfaction with emergency department (ED) HIV testing, acceptance varies widely. It is thought that patients who decline may be at higher risk for HIV infection, thus we sought to better understand patient acceptance and refusal of ED HIV testing.

METHODS

In-depth interviews with fifty ED patients (28 accepters and 22 decliners of HIV testing) in three ED HIV testing programs that serve vulnerable urban populations in northern California.

RESULTS

Many factors influenced the decision to accept ED HIV testing, including curiosity, reassurance of negative status, convenience, and opportunity. Similarly, a number of factors influenced the decision to decline HIV testing, including having been tested recently, the perception of being at low risk for HIV infection due to monogamy, abstinence or condom use, and wanting to focus on the medical reason for the ED visit. Both accepters and decliners viewed ED HIV testing favorably and nearly all participants felt comfortable with the testing experience, including the absence of counseling. While many participants who declined an ED HIV test had logical reasons, some participants also made clear that they would prefer not to know their HIV status rather than face psychosocial consequences such as loss of trust in a relationship or disclosure of status in hospital or public health records.

CONCLUSIONS

Testing for HIV in the ED as for any other health problem reduces barriers to testing for some but not all patients. Patients who decline ED HIV testing may have rational reasons, but there are some patients who avoid HIV testing because of psychosocial ramifications. While ED HIV testing is generally acceptable, more targeted approaches to testing are necessary for this subgroup.

OBJECTIVE

We undertook a longitudinal study in rural Uganda to understand the association of food insecurity with morbidity and patterns of healthcare utilization among HIV-infected individuals enrolled in an antiretroviral therapy program.

DESIGN

Longitudinal cohort study.

METHODS

Participants were enrolled from the Uganda AIDS Rural Treatment Outcomes cohort, and underwent quarterly structured interviews and blood draws. The primary predictor was food insecurity measured by the validated Household Food Insecurity Access Scale. Primary outcomes included health-related quality of life measured by the validated Medical Outcomes Study-HIV Physical Health Summary (PHS), incident self-reported opportunistic infections, number of hospitalizations, and missed clinic visits. To estimate model parameters, we used the method of generalized estimating equations, adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical variables. Explanatory variables were lagged by 3 months to strengthen causal interpretations.

RESULTS

Beginning in May 2007, 458 persons were followed for a median of 2.07 years, and 40% were severely food insecure at baseline. Severe food insecurity was associated with worse PHS, opportunistic infections, and increased hospitalizations (results were similar in concurrent and lagged models). Mild/moderate food insecurity was associated with missed clinic visits in concurrent models, whereas in lagged models, severe food insecurity was associated with reduced odds of missed clinic visits.

CONCLUSION

Based on the negative impact of food insecurity on morbidity and patterns of healthcare utilization among HIV-infected individuals, policies and programs that address food insecurity should be a critical component of HIV treatment programs worldwide.

The leading substance of misuse among teens after tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana is the use of pain killers. Very few longitudinal studies on prediction of pain killer use have been conducted among teens. This study examined the 1-year prediction of self-reported last 30-day pain killer use controlling for baseline 30-day painkiller use among 1186 alternative high school youth in California. Among demographic, behavioral, psychosocial, and environmental predictors, a multivariable model indicated that: (a) relatively higher levels of baseline pain killer use; (b) white ethnicity; (c) relatively lower levels of depressive symptoms (contrary to previous studies); and (d) those who live with both parents were more likely to report use of pain killer medications in the next year. It is speculated that those with relatively greater access to pain medication, within an at-risk social environment, are those who will use it later on.