Pediatric Surgery ClinicData AnalysisAre medical scribes effective in theoutpatient setting?Scribe Impact for providers:Sanjay Krishnaswami, MD, MarkSilen, MD and Garret Zallen, MD
Analysis & MethodsUtilizing financial data, the analysis pulls from five months of visit/billing data at the DoernbecherPediatric Surgery clinic when the scribe was in the office and out of the office. We consideredboth new and established patients, and divided the date per provider based on their varyingmethods for closing encounters and utilizing the scribe.• Period of analysis: May 1, 2012 – September 30, 2012We considered the following questions:• Are encounters closed faster with a scribe?• Is the clinic billing at a higher CPT code with ascribe?• Has patient volume increased with the scribe?
Patient Volume ComparisonsAverage dailypatient load withscribeAverage dailypatient loadwithout scribeOutliers /ConsiderationsSanjay Krishnaswami 12.7 patients 3.6 patientsMajority ofKrishnaswami’s patientsseen with the scribe inclinic, only 9 days of thefive months was hewithout the scribe.Mark Silen 9.3 patients 7.7 patientsGarret Zallen 8.6 patients 8.2 patients
Conclusions• Encounter closures: On average, Zallen and Krishnaswami closedencounters sooner on days they did not have a scribe. Silen appears tobenefit from the scribe in this respect, closing encounters much later ondays he did not have the scribe.• CPT Codes: Comparing clinic days with the scribe and without the scribe, itis apparent that they lead to greater level 3 and level 4 billing (99213,99214).• Patient Volume: Daily patient volume was averaged per provider with andwithout the scribe. All providers saw more patients on the days that thescribe was present.