Efficiency and safety of speech recognition for documentation in the electronic health record

Tobias Hodgson, Farah Magrabi, Enrico Coiera

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Objective: 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). Methods: 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. Results: 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. Discussion: 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. Conclusion: 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.

LanguageEnglish
Pages1127-1133
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association
Volume24
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Nov 2017

Fingerprint

Electronic Health Records
Documentation
Efficiency
Safety
Systems Integration
Workflow
Recognition (Psychology)
Patient Harm
Hospital Emergency Service
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

Bibliographical note

Copyright the Author(s) 2017. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.

Keywords

  • patient safety
  • electronic health record
  • speech recognition
  • documentation
  • medical errors

Cite this

@article{e308a7dd2c384f29a2278f7302710048,
title = "Efficiency and safety of speech recognition for documentation in the electronic health record",
abstract = "Objective: 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). Methods: 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. Results: 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. Discussion: 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. Conclusion: 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.",
keywords = "patient safety, electronic health record, speech recognition, documentation, medical errors",
author = "Tobias Hodgson and Farah Magrabi and Enrico Coiera",
note = "Copyright the Author(s) 2017. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.",
year = "2017",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/jamia/ocx073",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "1127--1133",
journal = "Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA",
issn = "1067-5027",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "6",

}

Efficiency and safety of speech recognition for documentation in the electronic health record. / Hodgson, Tobias; Magrabi, Farah; Coiera, Enrico.

In: Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, Vol. 24, No. 6, 01.11.2017, p. 1127-1133.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Efficiency and safety of speech recognition for documentation in the electronic health record

AU - Hodgson, Tobias

AU - Magrabi, Farah

AU - Coiera, Enrico

N1 - Copyright the Author(s) 2017. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.

PY - 2017/11/1

Y1 - 2017/11/1

N2 - Objective: 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). Methods: 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. Results: 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. Discussion: 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. Conclusion: 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.

AB - Objective: 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). Methods: 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. Results: 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. Discussion: 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. Conclusion: 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.

KW - patient safety

KW - electronic health record

KW - speech recognition

KW - documentation

KW - medical errors

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85032882322&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/1032664

U2 - 10.1093/jamia/ocx073

DO - 10.1093/jamia/ocx073

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 1127

EP - 1133

JO - Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

T2 - Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

JF - Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

SN - 1067-5027

IS - 6

ER -