Article Text

other Versions

Download PDFPDF
Online emergency department ratings, patient satisfaction and the age-old issue of communication
  1. Megan L Ranney1,
  2. Clayton A Peimer2
  1. 1Emergency Digital Health Innovation Program, Department of Emergency Medicine, Rhode Island Hospital, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA
  2. 2Department of Surgery (Orthopaedics), College of Human Medicine, Michigan State University, Upper Peninsula Health System, Marquette, Michigan, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Megan L Ranney, Emergency Digital Health Innovation Program, Department of Emergency Medicine, Rhode Island Hospital, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, 593 Eddy Street, Claverick 2, Providence, RI 02903, USA; mranney{at}

Statistics from

Kilaru et al1 report a well-designed and well-executed, retrospective, qualitative study, which suggests that one-third of online (Yelp-sourced) patients’ hospital reviews address care in emergency departments (EDs). Using strong qualitative methods, the authors describe the themes emerging from Yelp users’ free-text ED reviews. Some of these themes—communication with nurses, communication with doctors and pain control—correspond with the categories in the nationally accepted US Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey. Other themes—waiting and efficiency, decisions to seek care in the ED and the events following discharge—differ from HCAHPS’ domains. These findings are unlikely to surprise those working in an ED, although the report that the majority of comments are positive may be less expected.

This publication makes a useful contribution to the field of patient safety and satisfaction in several ways. First, it may inform future efforts to obtain patients’ feedback on their satisfaction with emergency services. As the authors note, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services is currently developing an ED-based version of HCAHPS. We hope that some of the ED-specific themes identified in this paper—which, importantly, match the correlates of ED-related satisfaction and …

View Full Text


  • Twitter Follow Megan Ranney at @meganranney

  • Contributors Both authors had substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, drafted the work and revised it critically for important intellectual content, gave final approval of the version to be published and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Linked Articles