职业倦怠专题:人工智能抄写员在医疗保健中的临床应用:系统综述。

IF 2.2 2区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL INFORMATICS
Applied Clinical Informatics Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-30 DOI:10.1055/a-2597-2017
Hadeel Hassan, Amy R Zipursky, Naveed Rabbani, Jacqueline G You, Gabe Tse, Evan Orenstein, Mondira Ray, Chase Parsons, Stella Shin, Gregory Lawton, Karim Jessa, Lillian Sung, Adam P Yan
{"title":"职业倦怠专题:人工智能抄写员在医疗保健中的临床应用:系统综述。","authors":"Hadeel Hassan, Amy R Zipursky, Naveed Rabbani, Jacqueline G You, Gabe Tse, Evan Orenstein, Mondira Ray, Chase Parsons, Stella Shin, Gregory Lawton, Karim Jessa, Lillian Sung, Adam P Yan","doi":"10.1055/a-2597-2017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Artificial intelligence (AI) scribes use advanced speech recognition and natural language processing to automate clinical documentation and ease administrative burden. However, little is known about the effect of AI scribes on clinicians, patients, and organizations.This study aimed to (1) propose an evaluation framework to guide future AI scribe implementations, (2) describe the effect of AI scribes along the domains proposed in the developed evaluation framework, and (3) identify gaps in the AI scribe implementation literature to be evaluated in future studies.Databases including Embase, Embase Classic, and Ovid Medline were searched, and a manual review was conducted of the New England Journal of Medicine AI. Studies published after 2021 that reported on the implementation of AI scribes in health care were included. Descriptive analysis was undertaken. Quality assessment was undertaken using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The nominal group technique was used to develop an evaluation framework.Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria, with 10 published in 2024. The most frequently used AI scribe was Dragon Ambient eXperience (<i>n</i> = 7, 64%). While clinicians often reported improved documentation quality, AI scribe accuracy varied, frequently requiring manual edits and raising occasional concerns about errors. Nine of 10 studies reported improvements in at least one efficiency metric, and seven of ten studies highlighted positive effects on clinician wellness and burnout. Patient experience was assessed in three studies, all reporting favorable outcomes.AI scribes represent a promising tool for improving clinical efficiency and alleviating documentation burden. This systematic review highlights the potential benefits of AI scribes, including reduced documentation time and enhanced clinician satisfaction, while also identifying critical challenges such as variable adoption, performance limitations, and gaps in evaluation.</p>","PeriodicalId":48956,"journal":{"name":"Applied Clinical Informatics","volume":" ","pages":"1121-1135"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12449105/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical Implementation of Artificial Intelligence Scribes in Health Care: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Hadeel Hassan, Amy R Zipursky, Naveed Rabbani, Jacqueline G You, Gabe Tse, Evan Orenstein, Mondira Ray, Chase Parsons, Stella Shin, Gregory Lawton, Karim Jessa, Lillian Sung, Adam P Yan\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2597-2017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Artificial intelligence (AI) scribes use advanced speech recognition and natural language processing to automate clinical documentation and ease administrative burden. However, little is known about the effect of AI scribes on clinicians, patients, and organizations.This study aimed to (1) propose an evaluation framework to guide future AI scribe implementations, (2) describe the effect of AI scribes along the domains proposed in the developed evaluation framework, and (3) identify gaps in the AI scribe implementation literature to be evaluated in future studies.Databases including Embase, Embase Classic, and Ovid Medline were searched, and a manual review was conducted of the New England Journal of Medicine AI. Studies published after 2021 that reported on the implementation of AI scribes in health care were included. Descriptive analysis was undertaken. Quality assessment was undertaken using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The nominal group technique was used to develop an evaluation framework.Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria, with 10 published in 2024. The most frequently used AI scribe was Dragon Ambient eXperience (<i>n</i> = 7, 64%). While clinicians often reported improved documentation quality, AI scribe accuracy varied, frequently requiring manual edits and raising occasional concerns about errors. Nine of 10 studies reported improvements in at least one efficiency metric, and seven of ten studies highlighted positive effects on clinician wellness and burnout. Patient experience was assessed in three studies, all reporting favorable outcomes.AI scribes represent a promising tool for improving clinical efficiency and alleviating documentation burden. This systematic review highlights the potential benefits of AI scribes, including reduced documentation time and enhanced clinician satisfaction, while also identifying critical challenges such as variable adoption, performance limitations, and gaps in evaluation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48956,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Clinical Informatics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1121-1135\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12449105/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Clinical Informatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2597-2017\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL INFORMATICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Clinical Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2597-2017","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:人工智能(AI)书记员使用先进的语音识别和自然语言处理来自动化临床文档并减轻管理负担。然而,人们对人工智能抄写员对临床医生、患者和组织的影响知之甚少。目标:(1)提出一个评估框架来指导未来的AI抄写器实施,(2)描述AI抄写器沿着已开发的评估框架中提出的领域的影响,以及(3)确定AI抄写器实施文献中的空白,以便在未来的研究中进行评估。方法:检索Embase、Embase Classic和Ovid Medline数据库,并人工检索《新英格兰医学杂志AI》。在2021年之后发表的关于在医疗保健领域实施人工智能抄写器的研究也被纳入其中。进行了描述性分析。使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表进行质量评估。采用名义组技术建立评价框架。结果:11项研究符合纳入标准,其中10项于2024年发表。最常用的AI脚本是Dragon Ambient eXperience (DAX) (n= 7,64%)。虽然临床医生经常报告提高了文档质量,但人工智能抄写员的准确性参差不齐,经常需要手工编辑,偶尔会引起对错误的担忧。10项研究报告了至少一项效率指标的改善,10项研究强调了对临床医生健康和倦怠的积极影响。在三项研究中评估了患者的体验,所有研究都报告了良好的结果。结论:人工智能记录仪是一种很有前途的工具,可以提高临床效率,减轻文件负担。该系统综述强调了人工智能抄写员的潜在好处,包括减少记录时间和提高临床医生满意度,同时也确定了关键挑战,如变量采用、性能限制和评估差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clinical Implementation of Artificial Intelligence Scribes in Health Care: A Systematic Review.

Artificial intelligence (AI) scribes use advanced speech recognition and natural language processing to automate clinical documentation and ease administrative burden. However, little is known about the effect of AI scribes on clinicians, patients, and organizations.This study aimed to (1) propose an evaluation framework to guide future AI scribe implementations, (2) describe the effect of AI scribes along the domains proposed in the developed evaluation framework, and (3) identify gaps in the AI scribe implementation literature to be evaluated in future studies.Databases including Embase, Embase Classic, and Ovid Medline were searched, and a manual review was conducted of the New England Journal of Medicine AI. Studies published after 2021 that reported on the implementation of AI scribes in health care were included. Descriptive analysis was undertaken. Quality assessment was undertaken using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The nominal group technique was used to develop an evaluation framework.Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria, with 10 published in 2024. The most frequently used AI scribe was Dragon Ambient eXperience (n = 7, 64%). While clinicians often reported improved documentation quality, AI scribe accuracy varied, frequently requiring manual edits and raising occasional concerns about errors. Nine of 10 studies reported improvements in at least one efficiency metric, and seven of ten studies highlighted positive effects on clinician wellness and burnout. Patient experience was assessed in three studies, all reporting favorable outcomes.AI scribes represent a promising tool for improving clinical efficiency and alleviating documentation burden. This systematic review highlights the potential benefits of AI scribes, including reduced documentation time and enhanced clinician satisfaction, while also identifying critical challenges such as variable adoption, performance limitations, and gaps in evaluation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Clinical Informatics
Applied Clinical Informatics MEDICAL INFORMATICS-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
24.10%
发文量
132
期刊介绍: ACI is the third Schattauer journal dealing with biomedical and health informatics. It perfectly complements our other journals Öffnet internen Link im aktuellen FensterMethods of Information in Medicine and the Öffnet internen Link im aktuellen FensterYearbook of Medical Informatics. The Yearbook of Medical Informatics being the “Milestone” or state-of-the-art journal and Methods of Information in Medicine being the “Science and Research” journal of IMIA, ACI intends to be the “Practical” journal of IMIA.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信