1990 年至 2018 年临床文档的语音识别:系统评价。
Speech recognition for clinical documentation from 1990 to 2018: a systematic review.
机构信息
Clinical and Quality Analysis, Information Systems, Partners HealthCare, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
General Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
出版信息
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2019 Apr 1;26(4):324-338. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocy179.
OBJECTIVE
The study sought to review recent literature regarding use of speech recognition (SR) technology for clinical documentation and to understand the impact of SR on document accuracy, provider efficiency, institutional cost, and more.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched 10 scientific and medical literature databases to find articles about clinician use of SR for documentation published between January 1, 1990, and October 15, 2018. We annotated included articles with their research topic(s), medical domain(s), and SR system(s) evaluated and analyzed the results.
RESULTS
One hundred twenty-two articles were included. Forty-eight (39.3%) involved the radiology department exclusively and 10 (8.2%) involved emergency medicine; 10 (8.2%) mentioned multiple departments. Forty-eight (39.3%) articles studied productivity; 20 (16.4%) studied the effect of SR on documentation time, with mixed findings. Decreased turnaround time was reported in all 19 (15.6%) studies in which it was evaluated. Twenty-nine (23.8%) studies conducted error analyses, though various evaluation metrics were used. Reported percentage of documents with errors ranged from 4.8% to 71%; reported word error rates ranged from 7.4% to 38.7%. Seven (5.7%) studies assessed documentation-associated costs; 5 reported decreases and 2 reported increases. Many studies (44.3%) used products by Nuance Communications. Other vendors included IBM (9.0%) and Philips (6.6%); 7 (5.7%) used self-developed systems.
CONCLUSION
Despite widespread use of SR for clinical documentation, research on this topic remains largely heterogeneous, often using different evaluation metrics with mixed findings. Further, that SR-assisted documentation has become increasingly common in clinical settings beyond radiology warrants further investigation of its use and effectiveness in these settings.
目的
本研究旨在回顾近期关于语音识别(SR)技术在临床文档中的应用的文献,并了解 SR 对文档准确性、医疗效率、机构成本等方面的影响。
材料和方法
我们在 10 个科学和医学文献数据库中搜索了自 1990 年 1 月 1 日至 2018 年 10 月 15 日期间发表的关于临床医生使用 SR 进行文档记录的文章。我们对纳入的文章进行了研究主题、医学领域和评估的 SR 系统等标注,并对结果进行了分析。
结果
共纳入 122 篇文章。其中 48 篇(39.3%)仅涉及放射科,10 篇(8.2%)涉及急诊医学;10 篇(8.2%)提到了多个科室。48 篇(39.3%)文章研究了生产力;20 篇(16.4%)研究了 SR 对文档时间的影响,结果不一。在所有 19 项(15.6%)评估周转时间的研究中,均报告了周转时间的缩短。29 篇(23.8%)进行了错误分析,但使用了不同的评估指标。报告的错误文档百分比范围为 4.8%至 71%;报告的单词错误率范围为 7.4%至 38.7%。7 篇(5.7%)研究评估了与文档相关的成本;5 篇报告成本降低,2 篇报告成本增加。许多研究(44.3%)使用了 Nuance Communications 的产品。其他供应商包括 IBM(9.0%)和飞利浦(6.6%);7 篇(5.7%)使用了自行开发的系统。
结论
尽管 SR 在临床文档中得到了广泛应用,但关于这一主题的研究仍然存在很大的异质性,往往使用不同的评估指标,结果不一。此外,SR 辅助文档记录在放射科以外的临床环境中变得越来越普遍,这使得进一步研究其在这些环境中的应用和有效性变得尤为必要。