5 ms·

We have a plastic surgeon, in in my county, that pissed off a lot of patients. She must have over 50 negative reviews. Well she sued most of them. I think th

We have a plastic surgeon, in in my county, that pissed off a lot of patients. She must have over 50 negative reviews. Well she sued most of them. I think the lawyer sued 45 of them. The judge ruled against all the lawsuits. All thrown out of court. Now, the physician resorts to describing what was physically wrong with the patient online in a rebuttal. For instance, "Susan--you seemed happy when we removed those ugly brown spots I removed?" I've been suprised she hasen't been accused of voilating HIPPA either. I don't use Yelp. I honestly try to stay away from most doctors--just don't like most of them. Out of all the professions, MD's seem to dislike Yelp the most. Gone are the days where they can treat patients like dirt, and the patient has no recourse--other than dying. It's too bad that physicians are so arrogant. I don't get it. The last twenty years have exposed the profession to be so much of an art? (I do try to recognize the Doctor who is taking on hard cases, and give that Doctor a large benefit of the doubt. For instance, the medi-cal Doctor gets a get out of jail free card, but most of the negative reviews are for the doctors who are charging $350.00 hr, in good areas of the county?)

enraged_camel 10y ago
I'm sorry you have had such bad experiences with doctors. Doctors dislike review sites in general. The reason is that, in the age of the Internet, patients think they know everything. A lot of them go to the doctor and demand a prescription for a certain drug because they read on the Internet that it would cure their condition. When the doctor refuses (for obvious reasons) the patient gives them a 1-star review. That's just one example of how patients can be real assholes and why doctors don't like review sites.
- barking 10y ago
  Of course there are bad doctors but anonymous review sites are manna from heaven for assholes. Patients who complain the loudest, for example, about being kept waiting are commonly the ones who demand an appointment at the drop of a hat. The same patients will fail to attend appointments or cancel after the event. If they are fitted in because of an 'emergency' they are unhappy when people already waiting are seen before them. And, of course, they prefer to be sent a bill rather than pay on the day. Doctors' receptionists have a reputation for being a bit hard-faced but they don't start out that way. A small percentage of heart-sink patients do their best to ruin it for everyone else.
jrapdx3 10y ago
The practice of medicine has always been an art, notwithstanding availability of advanced diagnostic and treatment technologies. Of course it's an art based in science. However, in truth, the science is not fully developed in many if not most disorders, leaving providers to try to help with the limited tools at their disposal. Providing care is finding the delicate balance among sciences and arts, inevitably there are ambiguous tests, marginally effective treatments, rare/impossible to predict side-effects and frequent backtracking to try yet another option. Some patients will misconstrue this less than ideal algorithm as mistreatment even when informed it represents the imperfect state of the art. Certain perfectionistic individuals make unrealistic demands of care providers and may complain bitterly about less than optimum outcomes. Most patients aren't like that, but a few are. The notion that patients are "treated like dirt" these days is an unreasonably broad assertion that shouldn't be accepted without substantial evidence. No doubt there are occasional providers who are less than competent, notably unempathetic, mean-spirited, etc. There are ways to complain if it's warranted, medical societies and licensing bodies take these complaints very seriously. But by all means such instances deserve fair and dispassionate investigation. It may be hard to tell which Yelp "reviews" are authentic, and which may be authored by family members or friends just to rack up bad opinion about the doctor, or against any other service for that matter. OTOH it is unethical for a doctor to reveal anything about the patient without specific permission. I suppose write a review of the doctor's work is a tacit permission to respond, but it is always the patient's right to reveal info, but the doctor is limited in what can be said. That may be a reason health care providers are skittish about Yelp and the like. Because of confidentiality rules, ethical practitioners can't defend themselves against exaggerated, erroneous or even false claims made in a public listing. Anyone taking Yelp "reviews" seriously is probably accepting bad advice especially when it comes to seeking services as complex and nuanced as medical care. The arena of "reviews" by disgruntled customers seems like it's just starting to be explored by the courts. Physicians' organizations and licensing boards haven't yet addressed the questions about responding to unfair or inaccurate statements about physician or health care services. I imagine those discussions will indeed be lively.
- ap22213 10y ago
  When a doctor approaches their practice as a for-profit transactional business I believe they should be treated as any other similar business. If I go to a bakery and it is poorly run, or I am overcharged or mislead, or the product is of poor quality, I feel some duty to tell other potential customers. And, I feel even more strongly about for-profit doctors as well given what is at stake. In my particular case, the doctor was one of the 'top N in large metro area' doctors. After the visit, I realized that their placement in those rankings probably had more to do with how they spent money toward advertising and marketing than providing the best possible health care. Without public reviews, how else could a patient be able to anticipate the quality of care? Rely on boards of medicine? You have to understand that to many, the standards of those boards seems to have fallen into irrelevancy. Plus, they're not exactly impartial or unbiased anyway.

enraged_camel 10y ago

I'm sorry you have had such bad experiences with doctors. Doctors dislike review sites in general. The reason is that, in the age of the Internet, patients think they know everything. A lot of them go to the doctor and demand a prescription for a certain drug because they read on the Internet that it would cure their condition. When the doctor refuses (for obvious reasons) the patient gives them a 1-star review. That's just one example of how patients can be real assholes and why doctors don't like review sites.

barking 10y ago
Of course there are bad doctors but anonymous review sites are manna from heaven for assholes. Patients who complain the loudest, for example, about being kept waiting are commonly the ones who demand an appointment at the drop of a hat. The same patients will fail to attend appointments or cancel after the event. If they are fitted in because of an 'emergency' they are unhappy when people already waiting are seen before them. And, of course, they prefer to be sent a bill rather than pay on the day. Doctors' receptionists have a reputation for being a bit hard-faced but they don't start out that way. A small percentage of heart-sink patients do their best to ruin it for everyone else.

jrapdx3 10y ago

The practice of medicine has always been an art, notwithstanding availability of advanced diagnostic and treatment technologies. Of course it's an art based in science. However, in truth, the science is not fully developed in many if not most disorders, leaving providers to try to help with the limited tools at their disposal. Providing care is finding the delicate balance among sciences and arts, inevitably there are ambiguous tests, marginally effective treatments, rare/impossible to predict side-effects and frequent backtracking to try yet another option. Some patients will misconstrue this less than ideal algorithm as mistreatment even when informed it represents the imperfect state of the art. Certain perfectionistic individuals make unrealistic demands of care providers and may complain bitterly about less than optimum outcomes. Most patients aren't like that, but a few are. The notion that patients are "treated like dirt" these days is an unreasonably broad assertion that shouldn't be accepted without substantial evidence. No doubt there are occasional providers who are less than competent, notably unempathetic, mean-spirited, etc. There are ways to complain if it's warranted, medical societies and licensing bodies take these complaints very seriously. But by all means such instances deserve fair and dispassionate investigation. It may be hard to tell which Yelp "reviews" are authentic, and which may be authored by family members or friends just to rack up bad opinion about the doctor, or against any other service for that matter. OTOH it is unethical for a doctor to reveal anything about the patient without specific permission. I suppose write a review of the doctor's work is a tacit permission to respond, but it is always the patient's right to reveal info, but the doctor is limited in what can be said. That may be a reason health care providers are skittish about Yelp and the like. Because of confidentiality rules, ethical practitioners can't defend themselves against exaggerated, erroneous or even false claims made in a public listing. Anyone taking Yelp "reviews" seriously is probably accepting bad advice especially when it comes to seeking services as complex and nuanced as medical care. The arena of "reviews" by disgruntled customers seems like it's just starting to be explored by the courts. Physicians' organizations and licensing boards haven't yet addressed the questions about responding to unfair or inaccurate statements about physician or health care services. I imagine those discussions will indeed be lively.

ap22213 10y ago
When a doctor approaches their practice as a for-profit transactional business I believe they should be treated as any other similar business. If I go to a bakery and it is poorly run, or I am overcharged or mislead, or the product is of poor quality, I feel some duty to tell other potential customers. And, I feel even more strongly about for-profit doctors as well given what is at stake. In my particular case, the doctor was one of the 'top N in large metro area' doctors. After the visit, I realized that their placement in those rankings probably had more to do with how they spent money toward advertising and marketing than providing the best possible health care. Without public reviews, how else could a patient be able to anticipate the quality of care? Rely on boards of medicine? You have to understand that to many, the standards of those boards seems to have fallen into irrelevancy. Plus, they're not exactly impartial or unbiased anyway.