Finance and Time Use Implications of Team Documentation for Primary Care: A Microsimulation

The Use of Medical Scribes in Primary Care Settings: A Literature Synthesis

BACKGROUND

Clerical burdens have strained primary care providers already facing a shifting health care landscape and workforce shortages. These pressures may cause burnout and job dissatisfaction, with negative implications for patient care. Medical scribes, who perform real-time electronic health record documentation, have been posited as a solution to relieve clerical burdens, thus improving provider satisfaction and other outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to identify and synthesize the published research on medical scribe utilization in primary care and safety net settings.

RESEARCH DESIGN

We conducted a review of the literature to identify outcomes studies published between 2010 and 2020 assessing medical scribe utilization in primary care settings. Searches were conducted in PubMed and supplemented by a review of the gray literature. Articles for inclusion were reviewed by the study authors and synthesized based on study characteristics, medical scribe tasks, and reported outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 21 publications for inclusion, including 5 that examined scribes in health care safety net settings. Scribe utilization was consistently reported as being associated with improved productivity and efficiency, provider experience, and documentation quality. Findings for patient experience were mixed.

CONCLUSIONS

Published studies indicate scribe utilization in primary care may improve productivity, clinic and provider efficiencies, and provider experience without diminishing the patient experience. Further large-scale research is needed to validate the reliability of study findings and assess additional outcomes, including how scribes enhance providers' ability to advance health equity.

The Productivity Requirements of Implementing a Medical Scribe Program

BACKGROUND

Economic analyses of medical scribes have been limited to individual, specialty-specific clinics.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the number of additional patient visits various specialties would need to recover the costs of implementing scribes in their practice at 1 year.

DESIGN

Modeling study based on 2015 data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Scribe costs were based on literature review and a third-party contractor model. Revenue was calculated from direct visit billing, CPT (Current Procedural Terminology) billing, and data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey.

DATA SOURCES

2015 data from CMS and the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey.

TARGET POPULATION

Health care providers.

TIME HORIZON

1 year.

PERSPECTIVE

Office-based clinic.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The number of additional patient visits a physician must have to recover the costs of a scribe program at 1 year.

RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS

An average of 1.34 additional new patient visits per day (295 per year) were required to recover scribe costs (range, 0.89 [cardiology] to 1.80 [orthopedic surgery] new patient visits per day). For returning patients, an average of 2.15 additional visits per day (472 per year) were required (range, 1.65 [cardiology] to 2.78 [orthopedic surgery] returning visits per day). The addition of 2 new patient (or 3 returning) visits per day was profitable for all specialties.

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Results were not sensitive to most inputs, with the exception of hourly scribe cost and inclusion of CPT revenue.

LIMITATION

Use of Medicare data and failure to account for indirect costs, downstream revenue, or changes in documentation quality.

CONCLUSION

For all specialties, modest increases in productivity due to scribes may allow physicians to see more patients and offset scribe costs, making scribe programs revenue-neutral.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

University of Chicago Medicine's Center for Healthcare Delivery Science and Innovation and the Bucksbaum Institute.

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.