eHealthNews.nz: Digital Patient

Doctors concerned about ‘TripAdvisor of healthcare’ New Zealand launch

Friday, 27 July 2018   (2 Comments)

Return to eHealthNews.nz home page

Picture: The Whitecoat platform for rating healthcare providers

eHealthNews.nz editor Rebecca McBeth

A newly launched online platform that enables consumers to search, rate, review and compare local healthcare providers raises serious concerns, doctors say.

Dubbed the ‘TripAdvisor of healthcare’ in Australia where it was originally developed, its stated aim is to “help Kiwi consumers make more informed choices about their healthcare provider”.

However, the Association of Salaried Medical Professionals says the website is a “serious concern”.

Whitecoat features almost 10,000 healthcare providers across a range of health disciplines throughout New Zealand, including specialists, GPs, dentists and physiotherapists. Patients can rate their doctor across several categories and comment on their overall impressions.


“The launch of a website that allows patients to rate their doctors sets a dubious precedent with no guarantee of greater transparency or improved quality of care,” says Ian Powell, ASMS executive director.

“Not only that, it raises serious concerns about fair treatment of doctors if comments can be made about them without any context or attempt at verification.”

Whitecoat chief executive Matthew Donnellan says the digital platform presents a new way of connecting Kiwi consumers and providers who increasingly rely on the web and social media for information and consumer referrals.


“Historically, the healthcare market has lacked information, transparency and comparability. Consumers generally have had very limited access or ability to comprehend information relevant to their health and treatment, and consequently, many have experienced over-servicing, wide cost variation and avoidable hospitalisations,” he says.

“Whitecoat looks to change that by empowering patients to review their experience with healthcare professionals, and concurrently giving providers an opportunity to connect with patients, receive feedback and reply to reviews while also increasing their online presence.”


Powell says that “everyone working in healthcare wants a high quality, transparent and accountable public health sector, but this is not the way to do it. 

“It’s simplistic, flawed, potentially very unfair and without context. We don’t know what checks and balances are in place and there are no disclosures on the website about how the initiative is being funded.”

Donnellan says the company has worked closely with providers and industry associations to build support for the website and its functionality. It has also invested heavily to ensure that the privacy of individual providers and members is protected, and all reviews are strictly moderated and remain anonymous.


Founder of digital platform iMOKO and former New Zealander of the Year Lance O’Sullivan says the platform will keep health professionals accountable.

Royal New Zealand College of GPs medical director Richard Medlicott says GPs will have some anxieties about this, but to a certain extent it is the inevitable way of the internet. 

The college is looking to produce advice to GPs on how to manage adverse comments. 

In Australia, Whitecoat has added capabilities allowing bookings and payments to be made through the platform – features that will be made available in New Zealand in the future. 

The New Zealand launch is supported by health insurance provider nib.

Powell says ASMS has strong concerns about the backing of health insurance companies for the whitecoat website. He called for greater transparency about the organisation’s funding and business relationships, and mechanisms to ensure doctors were not singled out.


Return to eHealthNews.nz home page

Comments...

Te Wano Witika, The University of Auckland says...
Posted Thursday, 2 August 2018
This is perhaps a space that cannot be avoided, online reviews are already an accepted way of getting around on the internet, one part of technology embracement is the user behaviour that comes with it. As annoying as it may be and perhaps in some instances it could also be dangerous, it may be better to find ways of working with it and learning from the mistakes and errors. As a health consumer I see it as an opportuity to get raw feedback on potential future consultations and the opprtunity to have a choice in who I see, currently I dont have that choice, perhaps if that choice can be provided in an agreeable manner all would be happy, maybe that can be the direction whitecoat is taken.
Pam Olver, Brooklyn Central Health says...
Posted Wednesday, 1 August 2018
Some of our collective experience at the coalface suggests that a lot of people have no idea about the complexity of GP, how the health system actually works and have unrealistic expectations of what can be delivered in a 15 minute package of care that is dictated by constraints of the health system ( limited access to investigations and referrals). As Specialists in GP we are well placed to assess need. Patents complain when they don't get what they want. As if we don't have enough avenues for patients to formally complain we now have an opportunity for attack and criticism without the benefit of reply. If I had insurance with NIB I would be cancelling and I would never ever use them. Maybe GP's should pack their bags and leave patients to Dr Google and see how that goes for them - those complainers know it all and Dr Google has the benefit of not charging :). The HQSC runs a patient experience questionnaire - there is opportunity for patients to feedback to health providers already.