An industry survey reveals these key findings from clinicians:
93% negate that working with an EHR reduces time spent documenting care
67% respond that using a keyboard and mouse to document within an EHR proved to be a serious impediment to
efficiency and therefore an obstacle to adoption.
97% prefer a narrative — rather than structured data entry — as the more valuable resource in treating
patients.
96% believe that the patient’s individual story becomes lost using data entry.
Several studies and publicly available data echo the same observations:
The AC Group reports a 73% failure rate of EHRs due to usability frustrations. "Failure" was defined as not
using EHR for 80% of their patients.
The group also reviewed 573 charts and found that entering data into the EHR took an average of 9 times
longer than dictating a patient encounter.
If a health care provider sees an average of 20 patients each day, this translates to 180 minutes a day. The result: Providers either will see fewer patients or work longer hours.
FINDINGS: Documentation is more time-consuming, user adoption is low and the resulting records are less desirable than narrative text
Front End Speech
Front-end speech recognition, where words are displayed as they are spoken, require the provider to be responsible
for engine training as well as, editing and signing the document.
Even with the latest advancements in speech recognition software, shortcomings can induce errors in the
transcribed reports and thus seriously affect the outcome of treatment.
In many cases, SR means tethering physicians to a workstation, sometimes a specific workstation that recognizes
their voice.
In order for SR to be as accurate as possible, a user must immediately correct the errors made by the software
so the program will "learn" the intricacies of the user’s speech patterns.
Accuracy rates are touted to range from 70-99%, but even at 99% accuracy documents will require editing to
ensure the 1% does not impact patient care
Front-end SR takes considerably longer to use effectively than it does to simply dictate.
FINDINGS: Software accuracy is unreliable and documentation is more time-consuming when providers are required to edit and "teach" the program
The Emdat Approach
Provider documentation complements the implementation and utilization of an EHR system.
A hybrid approach accomplishes documentation goals without affecting physician performance.
Capitalizes on dictation, the most efficient means of documenting patient encounters.
Narrative documents can be quickly reviewed and distributed to external systems.
Supports Meaningful Use requirements by auto-popultaing EHR data templates with data derived from dictation.
Trained medical professionals transcribe documents in a medical transcription platform that integrates closely
with EHRs, providing content review and quick turnaround
SUCCESSES: Physician productivity is maximized, physician workflow and revenue capacity is retained, and patient encounters are documented comprehensively