Are EMR/EHR Really Cutting Down Transcription Cost/Jobs?? - Linked Healthcare

P R E S E N T S
Are EMR/EHR really cutting
DOWN
transcription cost/jobs?
10 Answers! - Uncut Bonus Edition

Found at comments on LinkedIn
http://bit.ly/acroseas
®
We read the question:
Are EMR/EHR Really Cutting Down Transcription Cost/Jobs??
Many think that "EMR/EHR" are simply born with the DNA to cut down transcription cost.
Many others think that "EMR/EHR" can be futile to the growth and future of transcription jobs.
Some others think that it is a combination of the two that makes EHR/EMR a deadly mix... What is your take?
Quotations may be attributed incorrectly. This is an unedited edition of “Let the People Speak.”™ All quotations have been previously made available to the general public. This free resource may be re-quoted with the following attribution:
LinkedIn® is a trademark of LinkedIn Corporation Mountain View, CA USA ©2008. Linkedin Healthcare is a group on LinkedIn. No other affiliation exists. These quotations do not necessarily reflect the opinion of anyone other than the person quoted.

Are EMR/EHR are really cutting down transcription cost/jobs??
Linda Tarkington wrote:
Owner at Remote Medical Transcription, Inc.
I have lost several clients who have implemented EMR, as well as VR (voice recognition) software. They may have to spend more of their time working with the process, but they would rather save the buck (at least in my experience).
Julie Weight wrote:
Owner at Sole Proprietor
I spoke to a friend who is head of transcription at a large university medical center, he informed us that, two years ago, they started rolling out the Epic EMR. Over the last 2 years, their transcription volume has dropped 50% and they expect it to decrease even more. The same thing was witnessed at Kaiser. Their goal is to have no transcriptionists whatsoever.
®

Andy Braverman wrote:
President & CTO at Apptec CorporationEMR/EHR in principal is a great idea. While the purchase of the EMR/EHR software will be initially expensive for the hospital, as long as they implement it right, it should over the long run help improve a person's healthcare continuity. The way to do it right, is for the doctor to dictate just as they have for decades. Dictation is the most efficient use of the doctor's time. The EMR/EHR should only be in front of the doctor to review a patient's records... not to input data into it. For data input into the EMR/EHR, that should be a "back office" task performed by the transcriptionist. All that changes is that instead of typing into Word (or what ever word processor you prefer), the transcriptionist will be typing into the EMR/EHR to click here, and type there. Everybody gets to keep their job... including the hospital administrator who won't get fired for having their doctors type at $200 an hour!
Am I biased about the need to continue to use the "traditional" method of having the doctor's dictate... yes, but for good reason. Not because I continue, as I have for 20 years now, to develop and sell dictation and transcription products, but because I've seen 20 years of "we'll be going SR any day now", and 40 years of "think metric!". I can give you dozens more examples of things that sounded great, but once shown the "light of day", their great promise quickly fades away.

Jagan Mohan Muthu wrote:
Business Development Executive at TDHS
The reason that it would cut down the transcription jobs is the EMRs are developed in such a way that physicians can generate report in just a click away, though it is not the case in all the specialties.
Robin Brewer wrote:
Medical Transcriptionist at Preferred Transcription
I do transcription for a large cancer hospital. I transcribe some very detailed reports for patients with all types of cancers. There is NO way a click of one button can generate all the individual information that is needed to be reported on each patient. NOT POSSIBLE! These are people's lives we are talking about here and all of their information needs to be documented in detail to make it possible to give them the best treatment that they deserve.

Dr. V.V. Pratap Reddy wrote:
CEO at Srija Solutions Private Limited
I have seen my clients move in and out of speech recognition software and some gave a trial try of EMR and finally they groaned and grunted. Now the SRS clients are back because in the end they are doing and redoing a work which is neither their primary job nor compensates the quality time lost. Regarding EMR, the best option physicians felt after a trial run was having transcription integrated or get it copy pasted into the system than spent on exotic software and ending up in digital nightmare. My experience is the doctors are looking going electronic way but not in a route that cuts into their quality time and ends up in a 'treatment-is-worse-than-disease' situation. I think what I feel is that we are currently passing through is a fluid situation borne out of pulls and counter pulls of different lobbying groups , might take some time to whittle down. Sadly, the central players - 'Doctor & patient' - have become non entities in the sordid drama of powerful lobbies. Can anyone answer me conscientiously; Does anybody really interested in cost reduction of healthcare? If its is really cared, I would have gone for a open-sourced, inter operable national repository of EMR which can be accessed at a fraction of cost by doctors or other parties to the issue. Why, it was not done? That shows the true intentions. So, Honey, it’s all money over there at Capitol Hill.

Cathy Leahy wrote:
Service Owner at Datamed Medical Transcription
If a doctor loses just one minute of productive time, he looses big money. The government incentives won't make up for the loss. Also, the former head of ONC says they will either be deferred or eliminated altogether. All this new fangled stuff is just some new toys for the kids to play with. The danger here is the transcriptionists are looking for other work and schools are eliminating the transcription programs.
Donna Literell wrote:
President & CEO, Elite Office Solutions
In my own transcription business, I have seen two accounts try to move to EMRs. I asked them the same question, "Isn't your time more productively spent seeing patients than typing?" We have had both accounts try EMRs and then come back to us because the physicians hated it and as you said, they realized they were losing money. For one account, we are actually copying-and-pasting into their EMR (because their platform does not have very good tools for transcription), so it's almost double the work, but the doctors realized how insane it was for them to be wasting their time doing what we do.

FarkhruddinKamdar wrote:
Managing Partner at K-SCRIBES INDIA
The simple logic is, an average human brain thinks faster than a super computer, so if us humans have difficulty working out accents and sounds, how can we expect a computer to. The counter to this somebody told me was that now there are software's programmed to mimic the human brain in what ever function they are designed to perform (read Prey by Michael Crichton), but I still believe it will take any program ages to make identify the difference between native accents. (A sizeable percentage of physicians in the U.S. are non-natives). EMR/EHR as Andy said is already facing a lot of resistance as far as Doctors using them is concerned, so that is not a very real threat anyways.

Lindsay Colorado wrote:
Student at MTEC
Not to mention but clicking boxes the physician's would be seeing patients as even less of an individual case-by-case basis and more of a group or subgroup. One can’t imagine the number of symptoms that would be missed because of the computer screen skipping steps based on the boxes checked. If this EMR is becoming part of the med student's program in school, they are probably trying to train doctors early on to be comfortable with this software?
RanjanRawat wrote:
Operations at Acroseas Consultancy Pvt. Ltd.
There is a lot of anxiety within the Medical Transcription industry about the popularity of Speech Recognition and how its going to take away our business.There are scores of different accents, and it takes time even for a human transcriptionist to get accustomed to it. And to the untrained ear, the voice would make very little sense. That kind of Speech Recognition technology would take years to develop if at all it does.

Stay connected to us on the following platforms:
@Acroseas on Twitter
Acroseas on Facebook Fan Page
acroseasmedicalservices.wordpress.com on Corporate Blog
www.acroseas.com on Website :-
®

Comments on LinkedIn http://bit.ly/acroseas
®
- The End -Brought to you by ACROSEAS
Quotations may be attributed incorrectly. All quotations have been previously made available to the general public. This free resource may be re-quoted with the following attribution:
LinkedIn® is a trademark of LinkedIn Corporation Mountain View, CA USA ©2008. Linkedin Healthcare is a group on LinkedIn. No other affiliation exists. These quotations do not necessarily reflect the opinion of anyone other than the person quoted.

http://acroseasmedicalservices.wordpress.com	50
http://www.acroseas.com	24
http://www.slideshare.net	9
https://www.acroseas.com	3
http://envision-solutions.net	3
http://learn.wallacestate.edu	1

Are EMR/EHR Really Cutting Down Transcription Cost/Jobs?? - Linked Healthcare

by Acroseas on Apr 09, 2010

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

6 Embeds 90

Statistics

Are EMR/EHR Really Cutting Down Transcription Cost/Jobs?? - Linked Healthcare — Presentation Transcript