Taking note: A qualitative study of implementing a scribing practice in team-based primary care clinics

Clinical Documentation During Scribed and Non-scribed Ophthalmology Office Visits

PURPOSE

Observe the impact of employing scribes on documentation efficiency in ophthalmology clinics.

DESIGN

Single-center retrospective cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 29,997 outpatient visits conducted by seven attending ophthalmologists between 1/1/2018 and 12/31/2019 were included in the study; 18,483 with a scribe present during the encounter and 11,514 without a scribe present.

INTERVENTION

Use of a scribe.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Total physician documentation time, physician documentation time during and after the visit, visit length, time to chart closure, note length, and percent of note text edited by physician.

RESULTS

Total physician documentation time was significantly less when working with a scribe (mean ± SD, 4.7 ± 2.9 vs. 7.6 ± 3.8 minutes/note, P<.001), as was documentation time during the visit (2.8 ± 2.2 vs. 5.9 ± 3.1 minutes/note, P<.001). Physicians also edited scribed notes less, deleting 1.9 ± 4.4% of scribes' draft note text and adding 14.8 ± 11.4% of the final note text, compared to deleting 6.0 ± 9.1%(P<.001) of draft note text and adding 21.2 ± 15.3%(P<.001) of final note text when not working with a scribe. However, physician after-visit documentation time was significantly higher with a scribe for 3 of 7 physicians (P<.001). Scribe use was also associated with an office visit length increase of 2.9 minutes (P<.001) per patient and time to chart closure of 3.0 hours (P<.001), according to mixed-effects linear models.

CONCLUSIONS

Scribe use was associated with increased documentation efficiency through lower total documentation time and less note editing by physicians. However, the use of a scribe was also associated with longer office visit lengths and time to chart closure. The variability in the impact of scribe use on different measures of documentation efficiency leaves unanswered questions about best practices for the implementation of scribes, and warrants further study of effective scribe use.

An interview study with medical scribes on how their work may alleviate clinician burnout through delegated health IT tasks

OBJECTIVES

To understand how medical scribes' work may contribute to alleviating clinician burnout attributable directly or indirectly to the use of health IT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Qualitative analysis of semistructured interviews with 32 participants who had scribing experience in a variety of clinical settings.

RESULTS

We identified 7 categories of clinical tasks that clinicians commonly choose to offload to medical scribes, many of which involve delegated use of health IT. These range from notes-taking and computerized data entry to foraging, assembling, and tracking information scattered across multiple clinical information systems. Some common characteristics shared among these tasks include: (1) time-consuming to perform; (2) difficult to remember or keep track of; (3) disruptive to clinical workflow, clinicians' cognitive processes, or patient-provider interactions; (4) perceived to be low-skill "clerical" work; and (5) deemed as adding no value to direct patient care.

DISCUSSION

The fact that clinicians opt to "outsource" certain clinical tasks to medical scribes is a strong indication that performing these tasks is not perceived to be the best use of their time. Given that a vast majority of healthcare practices in the US do not have the luxury of affording medical scribes, the burden would inevitably fall onto clinicians' shoulders, which could be a major source for clinician burnout.

CONCLUSIONS

Medical scribes help to offload a substantial amount of burden from clinicians-particularly with tasks that involve onerous interactions with health IT. Developing a better understanding of medical scribes' work provides useful insights into the sources of clinician burnout and potential solutions to it.

Safe use of the EHR by medical scribes: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

Hiring medical scribes to document in the electronic health record (EHR) on behalf of providers could pose patient safety risks because scribes often have no clinical training. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of scribes on patient safety. This included identification of best practices to assure that scribe use of the EHR is not a patient safety risk.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using a sociotechnical framework and the Rapid Assessment Process, we conducted ethnographic data gathering at 5 purposively selected sites. Data were analyzed using a grounded inductive/hermeneutic approach.

RESULTS

We conducted site visits at 12 clinics and emergency departments within 5 organizations in the US between 2017 and 2019. We did 76 interviews with 81 people and spent 80 person-hours observing scribes working with providers. Interviewees believe and observations indicate that scribes decrease patient safety risks. Analysis of the data yielded 12 themes within a 4-dimension sociotechnical framework. Results about the "technical" dimension indicated that the EHR is not considered overly problematic by either scribes or providers. The "environmental" dimension included the changing scribe industry and need for standards. Within the "personal" dimension, themes included the need for provider diligence and training when using scribes. Finally, the "organizational" dimension highlighted the positive effect scribes have on documentation efficiency, quality, and safety.

CONCLUSION

Participants perceived risks related to the EHR can be less with scribes. If healthcare organizations and scribe companies follow best practices and if providers as well as scribes receive training, safety can actually improve.

How does medical scribes' work inform development of speech-based clinical documentation technologies? A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Use of medical scribes reduces clinician burnout by sharing the burden of clinical documentation. However, medical scribes are cost-prohibitive for most settings, prompting a growing interest in developing ambient, speech-based technologies capable of automatically generating clinical documentation based on patient-provider conversation. Through a systematic review, we aimed to develop a thorough understanding of the work performed by medical scribes in order to inform the design of such technologies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Relevant articles retrieved by searching in multiple literature databases. We conducted the screening process following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) in guidelines, and then analyzed the data using qualitative methods to identify recurring themes.

RESULTS

The literature search returned 854 results, 65 of which met the inclusion criteria. We found that there is significant variation in scribe expectations and responsibilities across healthcare organizations; scribes also frequently adapt their work based on the provider's style and preferences. Further, scribes' job extends far beyond capturing conversation in the exam room; they also actively interact with patients and the care team and integrate data from other sources such as prior charts and lab test results.

DISCUSSION

The results of this study provide several implications for designing technologies that can generate clinical documentation based on naturalistic conversations taking place in the exam room. First, a one-size-fits-all solution will be unlikely to work because of the significant variation in scribe work. Second, technology designers need to be aware of the limited role that their solution can fulfill. Third, to produce comprehensive clinical documentation, such technologies will likely have to incorporate information beyond the exam room conversation. Finally, issues of patient consent and privacy have yet to be adequately addressed, which could become paramount barriers to implementing such technologies in realistic clinical settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Medical scribes perform complex and delicate work. Further research is needed to better understand their roles in a clinical setting in order to inform the development of speech-based clinical documentation technologies.