Transparency in quality reporting goes both ways.  Good ratings – and bad – are posted every day for all kinds of products and services. When it comes to health care, I absolutely believe in transparency and public reporting of quality and patient safety measures. In fact, right now we’re in the process of creating a brand new “Quality Matters” microsite for one of our clients.

Recently, MSNBC reported that some physicians were having patients sign “gag order” waivers to prevent their ranting on review Web sites. Unbelievable.  Would you trust a physician who required you to sign such a document? Allowing patients to review doctors on Web sites is not only is in the best interest of consumers and public health, but it is also a matter of freedom of speech. In fairness, however, I believe doctors should be exempt from federal privacy laws that prevent them from publicly responding to patients. 

As healthcare marketers, we may not be able to change federal law, but we can help manage the reputation of our physician clients on these Web sites.  Here’s how:

1. Use a username that clearly identifies you as a representative from the practice, such as OfficeMgr_SmithMedical, with proper contact information in the user profile.
2. Acknowledge comments with replies that let reviewers know you are listening (without, of course, acknowledging patient name or identification).
3. Direct patients to contact a specific person at the practice to voice concerns and resolve issues.
4. Encourage reviewers to continue the conversation with your practice.

I’ve been thinking a lot about how much transparency can impact the success of a clinical program and how it transforms the way hospitals conduct strategic planning for a service line. It used to be that hospitals prioritized strategic initiatives based on clinical strength, community need, profitability, technical capability and volume forecasts. That approach used to make sense, but now that information about hospital outcomes, patient satisfaction and physician ratings are easily available online, strategic initiatives have to focus on providing value for patients. Think about it. Patients are starting to demand value. They are making decisions based on value, especially if they have a consumer driven health plan with high deductibles and co-payments.

You can ensure your strategic plan is centered on providing value by incorporating the principles of value-based competition into your service line development. Here they are:

• The focus should be on value for patients, not just lowering costs.
• Competition must be based on results.
• Competition should center on medical conditions over the full cycle of care.
• In the end, high-quality care should be less costly.
• Value must be driven by provider experience, scale, and learning at the medical condition level.
• Competition should be regional and national, not just local.
• Results information to support value-based competition must be widely available.
• Innovations that increase value must be strongly rewarded.

If anyone reading this has first-hand success using this approach, please share your experiences with our readers.