Original Article

Toward Successful Implementation of Speech Recognition Technology: A Survey of SRT Utilization Issues in Healthcare Settings

Authors: Martina A. Clarke, MS, Joshua L. King, MHA, Min Soon Kim, PhD

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate physician utilization of speech recognition technology (SRT) for medical documentation in two hospitals.

Methods: A quantitative survey was used to collect data in the areas of practice, electronic equipment used for documentation, documentation created after providing care, and overall thoughts about and satisfaction with the SRT. The survey sample was from one rural and one urban facility in central Missouri. In addition, qualitative interviews were conducted with a chief medical officer and a physician champion regarding implementation issues, training, choice of SRT, and outcomes from their perspective.

Results: Seventy-one (60%) of the anticipated 125 surveys were returned. A total of 16 (23%) participants were practicing in internal medicine and 9 (13%) were practicing in family medicine. Fifty-six (79%) participants used a desktop and 14 (20%) used a laptop (2%) computer. SRT products from Nuance were the dominant SRT used by 59 participants (83%). Windows operating systems (Microsoft, Redmond, WA) was used by more than 58 (82%) of the survey respondents. With regard to user experience, 42 (59%) participants experienced spelling and grammatical errors, 15 (21%) encountered clinical inaccuracy, 9 (13%) experienced word substitution, and 4 (6%) experienced misleading medical information.

Conclusions: This study shows critical issues of inconsistency, unreliability, and dissatisfaction in the functionality and usability of SRT. This merits further attention to improve the functionality and usability of SRT for better adoption within varying healthcare settings.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. David GC, Garcia AC, Rawls AW, et al. Listeningtowhat is said--transcribing what is heard: the impact of speech recognition technology (SRT) on the practice of medical transcription (MT). Sociol Health Illn 2009;31:924-938.
 
2. Health IT legislation and regulations. Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act of 2009. Certification and EHR incentives 2009. http://www.healthit.gov/policy-researchers-implementers/hitech-act. Accessed May 21, 2015.
 
3. Charles D, King J, Patel V, et al. Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. ONC Data Brief, no. 9. Adoption of electronic health record systems among U.S. non-federal acute care hospitals: 2008-2012. http://www.healthit.gov/sites/default/files/oncdatabrief9final.pdf. Published March 2013. Accessed May 21, 2015.
 
4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Meaningful use introduction. http://www.cdc.gov/ehrmeaningfuluse/introduction.html. Accessed May 21, 2015.
 
5. Morrison I, Smith R. Hamster health care. BMJ 2000;321:1541-1542.
 
6. Sun L. The rise of speech recognition technology in EHRs. http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/09/10/a-closer-look-at-speech-recognition-technology-in.aspx. Published September 10, 2013. Accessed May 21, 2015.
 
7. Nuance. Speech recognition: accelerating the adoption of electronic medical records. http://www.nuance.com/ucmprod/groups/dragon/documents/webasset/nd_004916.pdf. Published 2008. Accessed May 21, 2015.
 
8. Rozmus M. Transcription makeover. Virginia’s Rockingham Memorial Hospital improves its clinical documentation process by implementing advanced speech-recognition technologies. Health Manag Technol 2010;31:20-21.
 
9. Hart JL, McBride A, Blunt D, et al. Immediate and sustained benefits of a ‘‘total’’ implementation of speech recognition reporting. Br J Radiol 2010;83:424-427.
 
10. Basma S, Lord B, Jacks LM, et al. Error rates in breast imaging reports: comparison of automatic speech recognition and dictation transcription. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;197:923-927.
 
11. Linder JA, Schnipper JL, Middleton B. Method of electronic health record documentation and quality of primary care. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2012;19:1019-1024.
 
12. Hawkins CM, Hall S, Hardin J, et al. Prepopulated radiology report templates: a prospective analysis of error rate and turnaround time. J Digit Imaging 2012;25:504-511.
 
13. Garcia AC, David GC, Chand D. Understanding the work of medical transcriptionists in the production of medical records. Health Informatics J 2010;16:87-100.
 
14. Gallavin G. 4 tips on great survey design. http://www.digitalgov.gov/2014/11/10/4-tips-on-great-survey-design. Accessed May 21, 2015.
 
15. Speech Recognition Solutions. Microphone selection guide. http://www.speechrecsolutions.com/microphone_selection_guide_full.htm. Published 2013. Accessed April 17, 2014.
 
16. Devine EG, Gaehde SA, Curtis AC. Comparative evaluation of three continuous speech recognition software packages in the generation of medical reports. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2000;7:462-468.
 
17. Thomas Jefferson University, Sidney Kimmel Medical College. SOAP notes. http://www.jefferson.edu/university/jmc/students/alpha-omega-alpha/guides/clinical-years-guide/soap-notes.html. Accessed February 24, 2015.
 
18. Physician SOAP notes. http://www.physiciansoapnotes.com/. Accessed February 24, 2015.
 
19. The Free Dictionary by Farlex. Assessment. http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/assessment. Accessed April 15, 2012.
 
20. Bawden DC, Holtham C, Courtney N. Perspectives on information overload. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/EUM0000000006984. Published 1999. Accessed May 21, 2015.
 
21. Clarke MA, Steege LM, Moore JL, et al. Determining primary care physician information needs to inform ambulatory visit note display. Appl Clin Inform 2014;5:169-190.
 
22. McMullen R. Badly designed electronic medical records can kill you. http://www.fastcodesign.com/1664763/badly-designed-electronic-medicalrecords-can-kill-you. Published 2011. Accessed May 21, 2015.
 
23. Clarke MA, Belden JL, Koopman RJ, et al. Information needs and information-seeking behaviour analysis of primary care physicians and nurses: a literature review. Health Info Libr J 2013;30:178-190.
 
24. Nuance Communications. EHR adoption study: what physicians really think about meaningful use. http://www.nuance.com/for-healthcare/ehr-meaningful-use-physician-study/index.htm. Accessed May 21, 2015.
 
25. McGurk S, Brauer K, Macfarlane TV, et al. The effect of voice recognition software on comparative error rates in radiology reports. Br J Radiol 2008;81:767-770.
 
26. Luchetski JE. Physician champion role in an electronic health record implementation, a case history. http://digitalcommons.hsc.unt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1093&context=theses. Published 2010. Accessed May 21, 2015.
 
27. Parente R, Kock N, Sonsini J. An analysis of the implementation and impact of speech-recognition technology in the healthcare sector. Perspect Health Inf Manag 2004;1:5.
 
28. Hoyt R, Yoshihashi A. Lessons learned from implementation of voice recognition for documentation in the military electronic health record system. Perspect Health Inf Manag 2010;7:1e.
 
29. Voll K, Atkins S, Forster B. Improving the utility of speech recognition through error detection. J Digit Imaging 2008;21:371=377.
 
30. Yackanicz L, Kerr R, Levick D. Physician buy-in for EMRs. J Healthc Inf Manag 2010;24:41-44.
 
31. Aagaard EM, Gonzales R, Camargo CA Jr, et al. Physician champions are key to improving antibiotic prescribing quality. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2010;36:109-116.