Online Reviews in a Major City: Who Will Choose You?
Alexander R. Gibstein1, Charles H. Thorne2, James P. Bradley1, Neil Tanna1.
1Northwell Health, Great Neck, NY, USA, 2Northwell Health, New York, NY, USA.
BACKGROUND: A large factor influencing a patient’s choice of aesthetic plastic surgeons is online patient reviews. The authors examined the quality and quantity of online patient reviews as they pertained to ASAPS plastic surgeons in the New York metro area.
METHODS: A database of New York plastic surgeons was generated from the official ASAPS website (surgery.org) using the “Find A Plastic Surgeon” tab. Plastic surgeons whose practices are located in counties within the New York metro area were included. Selected surgeons were divided into private and academic surgeons (defined as having a residency program). For each surgeon, the quantity and quality of their Google reviews were collected. Statistical analysis was used to determine the average rating and average number of Google reviews for each category of ASAPS aesthetic surgeons.
RESULTS: A total of 145 ASAPS aesthetic surgeons from the New York area were included in the study, both private (n=126) and academic (n=19). Because there was only a total of 19 academic/institution based surgeons in this sample, 19 private aesthetic surgeons were randomly selected from the sample of 126 private surgeons. When comparing the 19 randomly selected private practice surgeons to the sample of ASAPS academic surgeons, it was shown that private ASAPS New York aesthetic surgeons had both higher average quality and quantity of online patient Google reviews. There was a statistically significant difference for the quality of online reviews for private and academic aesthetic surgeons in the area (CI=95%, p=.0223). Similar results were found when comparing all private ASAPS surgeons (n=126) to all academic ASAPS surgeons (n=19); private ASAPS surgeons had a higher average rating and number of reviews when compared to academic surgeons, again representing a statistically significant difference for the quality of online reviews between private and academic surgeons (CI=95%, p=.031975). Finally, when comparing all private ASAPS members to all New York academic surgeons (both ASAPS and non-ASAPS members), there was a statistically significant difference for both the rating and the number of reviews between New York private and academic aesthetic surgeons (Rating: CI=95%, p=.012487; Number of Reviews: CI=95%, p=.000096).
CONCLUSIONS: There is a statistically significant difference in both the quality and quantity of online ratings for private and academic aesthetic surgeons.
Back to 2020 Abstracts