Online Patient Reviews of Breast Reconstruction: RealSelf Analysis

Author:

Pham Jason T.1,Kim Joshua K.2,Hunt Stephen E.2,Willette Dominique M.2,Tang Cathy J.2

Affiliation:

1. Eastern Virginia Medical School Division of Plastic Surgery, Norfolk, Virg.

2. The University of California, Irvine, Department of Plastic Surgery, Orange, Calif.

Abstract

Background: RealSelf is an online community that hosts an expansive number of online reviews for cosmetic and reconstructive plastic surgery procedures. The purpose of this study is to analyze patient satisfaction with breast reconstruction procedures from RealSelf to determine factors contributing to a positive or negative patient experience. Methods: The breast reconstruction category from RealSelf.com was analyzed using a web crawler-based application built from Python and Selenium. Reviews were collected from May 2009 to November 2021. Information including RealSelf’s inherent “worth it” ranking system, review text, the number of submitted photographs, and the number of readers who found the review helpful was captured. The content of the review was then independently reviewed by the authors and was categorized with key factors that determined positive or negative reviews. Results: A total of 3451 breast reconstruction reviews were collected. After the authors analyzed each review, 3225 (94.33%) were identified as positive reviews. The most common factors associated with positive reviews were physician demeanor (n = 2600, 31.7%), aesthetic outcome (n = 1955, 23.8%), or staff (n = 1543, 18.8%), while negative reviews were associated with unfavorable aesthetic outcome (n = 94, 28.9%), physician demeanor (n = 82, 25.2%), or postoperative complications (n = 75, 23.1%). Conclusions: Although there are surveys that analyze patient satisfaction for breast reconstruction, there has not been a study that analyzed a large online review database. Predominating factors in both positive and negative reviews were physician demeanor and aesthetic outcome.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Surgery,General Medicine

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3