A Qualitative Content Analysis of Online GP Reviews in Norway

Abstract BACKGROUND: The last decade has seen exponential growth in the use of physician rating websites (PRWs), particularly in the US and the UK. In contrast to traditional survey methods, the reviewers on PRWs voluntarily seek out such websites and leave anonymous, public reviews in a somewhat interactive environment. In 2012, Legelisten.no became the first PRW in Norway, inviting Norwegian patients to leave star-ratings and free-text comments reviewing their GPs (fastleger). AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the issues that reviewers on Legelisten.no bring up in describing their satisfaction or dissatisfaction with their GP, and how these issues are explored across the range of sampled reviews. The focus was on what GPs and researchers can learn from the reviews and their common themes. METHOD: A qualitative content analysis was carried out on the free-text comments from 120 randomly sampled GP reviews collected from Legelisten.no. The data was first translated from Norwegian to English. Following a strategy of directed content analysis, a trial coding was carried out on a select number of reviews using an initial codebook of a priori themes, with a final codebook developed during the entire coding process. The codes and their associated quotations were then examined for underlying themes. A brief analysis of frequently occurring words was also conducted. RESULTS: Reviewers focused on the GP and the consultation, where they valued personality factors, interpersonal skills, emotional support, an established relationship, and perceived technical competence. Customer service and availability were valued in receptionists and the clinic. Unexpected themes included how GPs handle the reviewers mental and psychological struggles. Reviewers demonstrated doctor-shopping tendencies consistent with the rise of healthcare consumerism, although doctor-patient loyalty was also present. The online, public nature of the reviews was seen in the reviewers awareness of an audience, their interaction with previous reviews, and the timing and purpose of their review. CONCLUSION: The results were consistent with previous studies which have shown that patients most value personality factors and interpersonal aspects of the GP and their consultation, along with perceived technical competence. However, the results may not be generalizable to the wider Norwegian population