This is an interesting problem with strong advocates on both side of the equation.
After going to the recent ACEP conference, it was apparent that scribe companies are coming "Out of the Woodwork" to offset the labor intensive enterprise Electronic Health Records being imposed on most emergency departments. Scribes cost approximately $12 - $18 per hour each. To offset these costs, the provider must see 2 - 3 more patient per shift. At this point with a general reduction of 20% of productivity per provider, this is not happening overall. Providers are struggling to stay even. In institutions where a scribe can function as a medical assistant, a "Go-For", data acquirer from the old medical records, interact with the patients, and print discharge instructions and prescriptions, the extra work is a plus. This is how most urgent cares function with an all-encompassing medical assistant with multiple roles. In institutions where the scribe just inputs what the provider states, they are expensive transcriptionists and typists.
Voice Activated technology is an extremely efficient alternative to transcription at much lower overall costs. The provider can dictate key components of the history of present illness and the assessment and plan- medical decision making sections of the records. This creates a unique non-cookie-cutter chart which helps the private MD, consultants, and your own colleagues, if the patient returns for follow-up. The problems come in where the EHR is not directly designed without a lot of work-arounds to allow easy dictation. The initial cost is $1,500 per provider, but transcription costs $7 - $8 chart and the money is regained in time with increased productivity.
Which one is recommended? It depends on the work flow of the ED, the EHR, and the personality of the provider. My personal preference is a user-friendly EHR and VAT, so you can take the savings to buy more physician assistant and/or nurse practitioner FTE's. This hopefully will lead to increased throughput, higher revenues, and increased patient and administration satisfaction. If my scribe is an all-purpose medical assistant, this would make a reasonable alternative.
Voice Activated technology is an extremely efficient alternative to transcription at much lower overall costs. The provider can dictate key components of the history of present illness and the assessment and plan- medical decision making sections of the records. This creates a unique non-cookie-cutter chart which helps the private MD, consultants, and your own colleagues, if the patient returns for follow-up. The problems come in where the EHR is not directly designed without a lot of work-arounds to allow easy dictation. The initial cost is $1,500 per provider, but transcription costs $7 - $8 chart and the money is regained in time with increased productivity.
Which one is recommended? It depends on the work flow of the ED, the EHR, and the personality of the provider. My personal preference is a user-friendly EHR and VAT, so you can take the savings to buy more physician assistant and/or nurse practitioner FTE's. This hopefully will lead to increased throughput, higher revenues, and increased patient and administration satisfaction. If my scribe is an all-purpose medical assistant, this would make a reasonable alternative.
No comments:
Post a Comment