Sasseville Maxime, Yousefi Farzaneh, Ouellet Steven, Naye Florian, Stefan Théo, Carnovale Valérie, Bergeron Frédéric, Ling Linda, Gheorghiu Bobby, Hagens Simon, Gareau-Lajoie Samuel, LeBlanc Annie
Faculté des Sciences Infirmières, Université Laval, Québec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada.
VITAM-Centre de Recherche en Santé Durable, Québec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada.
Healthcare (Basel). 2025 Jun 16;13(12):1447. doi: 10.3390/healthcare13121447.
Burnout among clinicians, including physicians, is a growing concern in healthcare. An overwhelming burden of clinical documentation is a significant contributor. While medical scribes have been employed to mitigate this burden, they have limitations such as cost, training needs, and high turnover rates. Artificial intelligence (AI) scribe systems can transcribe, summarize, and even interpret clinical conversations, offering a potential solution for improving clinician well-being. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of AI scribes in streamlining clinical documentation, with a focus on clinician experience, healthcare system efficiency, and patient engagement. We conducted a systematic review following Cochrane methods and PRISMA guidelines. Two reviewers conducted the selection process independently. Eligible intervention studies included quantitative and mixed-methods studies evaluating AI scribe systems. We summarized the data narratively. Eight studies were included. AI scribes demonstrated positive effects on healthcare provider engagement, with users reporting increased involvement in their workflows. The documentation burden showed signs of improvement, as AI scribes helped alleviate the workload for some participants. Many clinicians have found AI systems to be user-friendly and intuitive, although some have expressed concerns about scribe training and documentation quality. A limited impact on reducing burnout was found, although documentation time improved in some studies. Most of the studies reported in this review involved small sample sizes and specific healthcare settings, limiting the generalizability of the findings to other contexts. Accuracy and consistency can vary significantly depending on the specific technology, model training data, and implementation approach. AI scribes show promise in improving documentation efficiency and clinician workflow, although the evidence remains limited and heterogeneous. Broader and real-world evaluations are needed to confirm their effectiveness and inform responsible implementations.
包括医生在内的临床医生职业倦怠是医疗保健领域日益受到关注的问题。临床文档的沉重负担是一个重要因素。虽然已聘请医疗抄写员来减轻这一负担,但他们存在成本、培训需求和高离职率等局限性。人工智能(AI)抄写系统可以转录、总结甚至解释临床对话,为改善临床医生的健康状况提供了一种潜在的解决方案。我们旨在评估人工智能抄写员在简化临床文档方面的有效性,重点关注临床医生的体验、医疗系统效率和患者参与度。我们按照Cochrane方法和PRISMA指南进行了系统评价。两名评价员独立进行筛选过程。符合条件的干预研究包括评估人工智能抄写系统的定量和混合方法研究。我们对数据进行了叙述性总结。纳入了八项研究。人工智能抄写员对医疗服务提供者的参与度产生了积极影响,用户报告称他们在工作流程中的参与度有所提高。文档负担有改善的迹象,因为人工智能抄写员帮助一些参与者减轻了工作量。许多临床医生发现人工智能系统用户友好且直观,尽管有些人对抄写员培训和文档质量表示担忧。虽然在一些研究中记录时间有所改善,但发现对减少职业倦怠的影响有限。本综述中报告的大多数研究样本量较小且特定于医疗环境,限制了研究结果在其他环境中的普遍性。准确性和一致性可能因具体技术、模型训练数据和实施方法而有很大差异。人工智能抄写员在提高文档效率和临床医生工作流程方面显示出前景,尽管证据仍然有限且参差不齐。需要进行更广泛的现实世界评估,以确认其有效性并为负责任的实施提供信息。