Table 2.
Types of Comments for Compliments a
| Surgical Reviews (n = 200) | Nonsurgical Reviews (n = 200) | Rate Ratio b | P | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical compliments | ||||
| Good outcomes | 131 (66) | 42 (21) | 0.32 | <.001 |
| Provided alternative treatment plans to surgery | 15 (8) | 40 (20) | 2.67 | <.001 |
| Well-controlled pain | 41 (21) | 11 (6) | 0.27 | <.001 |
| Correct diagnosis | 10 (5) | 15 (8) | 1.50 | .197 |
| Agree with clinical decisions/treatment plan | 1 (1) | 2 (1) | 2.00 | .480 |
| Clear treatment plans | 91 (46) | 100 (50) | 1.10 | .368 |
| No delays in care | 6 (3) | 0 (0) | — | — |
| Nonclinical compliments | ||||
| Good physician bedside manner | 141 (71) | 146 (73) | 1.04 | .679 |
| Good midlevel bedside manner | 20 (10) | 14 (7) | 0.70 | .109 |
| Friendly/professional staff | 95 (48) | 99 (50) | 1.04 | .688 |
| Short wait time | 16 (8) | 34 (17) | 2.13 | .002 |
| Enough time spent with provider | 21 (11) | 24 (12) | 1.14 | .540 |
| Cost | 0 (0) | 2 (1) | — | — |
| Clear billing/insurance | 12 (6) | 3 (2) | 0.25 | <.001 |
| Nice facilities | 8 (4) | 17 (9) | 2.13 | .029 |
| Ease of scheduling that contributed to no delays in care | 33 (17) | 35 (18) | 1.06 | .735 |
a Data are reported as n (%) unless otherwise indicated. Boldface P values indicate a statistically significant difference between groups (P < .05).Dashes indicate unable to calculate the p value.
b Nonsurgical/surgical reviews.