Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Clinical & Quality Analysis, Partners HealthCare System, Boston, MA, USA.
Int J Med Inform. 2019 Oct;130:103938. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.07.017. Epub 2019 Jul 31.
To assess the role of speech recognition (SR) technology in clinicians' documentation workflows by examining use of, experience with and opinions about this technology.
We distributed a survey in 2016-2017 to 1731 clinician SR users at two large medical centers in Boston, Massachusetts and Aurora, Colorado. The survey asked about demographic and clinical characteristics, SR use and preferences, perceived accuracy, efficiency, and usability of SR, and overall satisfaction. Associations between outcomes (e.g., satisfaction) and factors (e.g., error prevalence) were measured using ordinal logistic regression.
Most respondents (65.3%) had used their SR system for under one year. 75.5% of respondents estimated seeing 10 or fewer errors per dictation, but 19.6% estimated half or more of errors were clinically significant. Although 29.4% of respondents did not include SR among their preferred documentation methods, 78.8% were satisfied with SR, and 77.2% agreed that SR improves efficiency. Satisfaction was associated positively with efficiency and negatively with error prevalence and editing time. Respondents were interested in further training about using SR effectively but expressed concerns regarding software reliability, editing and workflow.
Compared to other documentation methods (e.g., scribes, templates, typing, traditional dictation), SR has emerged as an effective solution, overcoming limitations inherent in other options and potentially improving efficiency while preserving documentation quality.
While concerns about SR usability and accuracy persist, clinicians expressed positive opinions about its impact on workflow and efficiency. Faster and better approaches are needed for clinical documentation, and SR is likely to play an important role going forward.
通过考察语音识别(SR)技术的使用情况、使用体验和使用者对此项技术的看法,评估其在临床医生文档记录工作流程中的作用。
我们于 2016 年至 2017 年在马萨诸塞州波士顿和科罗拉多州奥罗拉的两家大型医疗中心向 1731 名临床医师 SR 用户发放了一份调查问卷。问卷询问了受访者的人口统计学和临床特征、SR 使用和偏好、感知准确性、效率和可用性以及整体满意度。使用有序逻辑回归分析了结果(例如满意度)与因素(例如错误发生率)之间的关系。
大多数受访者(65.3%)使用其 SR 系统的时间不足一年。75.5%的受访者估计每次听写会出现 10 个或更少的错误,但 19.6%的受访者估计有一半或更多的错误具有临床意义。尽管 29.4%的受访者不将 SR 作为其首选的文档记录方法之一,但 78.8%的受访者对 SR 感到满意,77.2%的受访者认为 SR 提高了效率。满意度与效率呈正相关,与错误发生率和编辑时间呈负相关。受访者有兴趣接受有关有效使用 SR 的进一步培训,但对软件可靠性、编辑和工作流程表示担忧。
与其他文档记录方法(例如抄写员、模板、打字、传统听写)相比,SR 已成为一种有效的解决方案,克服了其他选项固有的局限性,同时可能提高效率,同时保持文档质量。
尽管人们对 SR 的可用性和准确性仍存在担忧,但临床医生对其对工作流程和效率的影响持积极看法。临床文档记录需要更快、更好的方法,而 SR 很可能在未来发挥重要作用。