Hodgson Tobias, Magrabi Farah, Coiera Enrico
Centre for Health Informatics, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, North Ryde, Australia.
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017 Nov 1;24(6):1127-1133. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocx073.
To compare the efficiency and safety of using speech recognition (SR) assisted clinical documentation within an electronic health record (EHR) system with use of keyboard and mouse (KBM).
Thirty-five emergency department clinicians undertook randomly allocated clinical documentation tasks using KBM or SR on a commercial EHR system. Tasks were simple or complex, and with or without interruption. Outcome measures included task completion times and observed errors. Errors were classed by their potential for patient harm. Error causes were classified as due to IT system/system integration, user interaction, comprehension, or as typographical. User-related errors could be by either omission or commission.
Mean task completion times were 18.11% slower overall when using SR compared to KBM (P = .001), 16.95% slower for simple tasks (P = .050), and 18.40% slower for complex tasks (P = .009). Increased errors were observed with use of SR (KBM 32, SR 138) for both simple (KBM 9, SR 75; P < 0.001) and complex (KBM 23, SR 63; P < 0.001) tasks. Interruptions did not significantly affect task completion times or error rates for either modality.
For clinical documentation, SR was slower and increased the risk of documentation errors, including errors with the potential to cause clinical harm compared to KBM. Some of the observed increase in errors may be due to suboptimal SR to EHR integration and workflow.
Use of SR to drive interactive clinical documentation in the EHR requires careful evaluation. Current generation implementations may require significant development before they are safe and effective. Improving system integration and workflow, as well as SR accuracy and user-focused error correction strategies, may improve SR performance.
比较在电子健康记录(EHR)系统中使用语音识别(SR)辅助临床文档记录与使用键盘和鼠标(KBM)的效率和安全性。
35名急诊科临床医生在商业EHR系统上使用KBM或SR随机分配临床文档记录任务。任务分为简单或复杂,且有或无中断情况。结果指标包括任务完成时间和观察到的错误。错误根据其对患者造成伤害的可能性进行分类。错误原因分为因信息技术系统/系统集成、用户交互、理解问题或排版错误。与用户相关的错误可能是遗漏或失误。
与KBM相比,使用SR时总体平均任务完成时间慢18.11%(P = 0.001),简单任务慢16.95%(P = 0.050),复杂任务慢18.40%(P = 0.009)。使用SR时观察到的错误增加(KBM为32个,SR为138个),简单任务(KBM为9个,SR为75个;P < 0.001)和复杂任务(KBM为23个,SR为63个;P < 0.001)均如此。中断对两种方式的任务完成时间或错误率均无显著影响。
对于临床文档记录,与KBM相比,SR速度较慢且增加了文档记录错误的风险,包括有可能导致临床伤害的错误。观察到的错误增加部分可能归因于SR与EHR集成以及工作流程的欠佳。
在EHR中使用SR驱动交互式临床文档记录需要仔细评估。当前一代的实现方式在安全有效之前可能需要大量开发。改善系统集成和工作流程,以及SR准确性和以用户为中心的错误纠正策略,可能会提高SR性能。