"Increasingly used as a measure of physician performance, patient satisfaction data can be flawed and not broadly applicable," said Terence Myckatyn of Washington University School of Medicine in the US.
"While patient satisfaction is important, we think that better rating tools are needed to measure it," said Myckatyn.
Myckatyn and colleagues share some concerns about the trend towards using patient satisfaction ratings as a measure of physician performance.
The focus on patient satisfaction is driven by the fact that the US spends more than any other nation on health-care, but lags behind in outcomes, researchers said.
However, using patient satisfaction ratings in this way is having some unintended consequences, the researchers said.
For example, some hospitals are upgrading their physical facilities and adding luxury amenities, in an attempt to improve patient satisfaction scores.
"One could argue that these costly expenses have more to do with the perception of health-care quality rather than actual outcomes," Myckatyn said.
There are even anecdotal reports of doctors altering their medical judgement to improve patient satisfaction and minimise negative reviews - for example, prescribing antibiotics or strong pain medications to keep patients happy and move them quickly through the system.
Meanwhile, it is unclear whether satisfaction and other measures of patient experience are correlated with traditional measures of health care safety and quality.
"The truth is that there is little high-level evidence to support that patient satisfaction surveys will provide Americans with improved medical outcomes, but there are plenty of contradictory data," said Myckatyn.
Some studies even suggest that higher-intensity health-care is associated with increased patient satisfaction but also with increased mortality, with no impact on objective quality measures.
While other studies have linked higher satisfaction to better outcomes, interpretation of these studies is limited by the fact that patient satisfaction is "inherently subjective and labile."
The research was published in the journal Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
