The Impact of Medical Scribes on Patient Satisfaction in an Academic Otolaryngology Clinic

Katherine R. Keefe, Jessica R. Levi, C. Brook
{"title":"The Impact of Medical Scribes on Patient Satisfaction in an Academic Otolaryngology Clinic","authors":"Katherine R. Keefe, Jessica R. Levi, C. Brook","doi":"10.1177/0003489419884337","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: Evidence shows that scribes can improve provider efficiency and satisfaction in several settings, but is mixed on whether scribes improve patient satisfaction. We studied whether scribes improved patient satisfaction in an academic otolaryngology clinic. Methods: The authors performed a retrospective review of patient responses to the Press Ganey survey between 12/2016 and 12/2017. Their responses about satisfaction with the provider and wait times were examined. Three providers worked with scribes during this year; each spent six months with a scribe and six without. The authors compared survey responses from periods with and without scribes using the Fischer exact test. Average overall provider ratings were compared using the Student’s t-test. Results: A total of 87 patients filled out Press Ganey surveys for the 3 providers over the year: 54 for visits without scribes, and 33 for visits with scribes. Fischer exact analysis demonstrated no significant difference in satisfaction with providers and wait times for both individual providers and all providers combined (all P > .05). There was also no difference in patients’ likelihood of recommending the provider’s office (P = .91). Overall provider rating (0-10 scale) was high without scribes (9.48 ± 1.06) and was unchanged by the presence of scribes (9.53 ± 0.8) (P = .97). Conclusion: Patient satisfaction with wait times and providers was high overall and was not affected by the presence of a medical scribe.","PeriodicalId":8361,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology","volume":"48 1","pages":"238 - 244"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0003489419884337","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Objectives: Evidence shows that scribes can improve provider efficiency and satisfaction in several settings, but is mixed on whether scribes improve patient satisfaction. We studied whether scribes improved patient satisfaction in an academic otolaryngology clinic. Methods: The authors performed a retrospective review of patient responses to the Press Ganey survey between 12/2016 and 12/2017. Their responses about satisfaction with the provider and wait times were examined. Three providers worked with scribes during this year; each spent six months with a scribe and six without. The authors compared survey responses from periods with and without scribes using the Fischer exact test. Average overall provider ratings were compared using the Student’s t-test. Results: A total of 87 patients filled out Press Ganey surveys for the 3 providers over the year: 54 for visits without scribes, and 33 for visits with scribes. Fischer exact analysis demonstrated no significant difference in satisfaction with providers and wait times for both individual providers and all providers combined (all P > .05). There was also no difference in patients’ likelihood of recommending the provider’s office (P = .91). Overall provider rating (0-10 scale) was high without scribes (9.48 ± 1.06) and was unchanged by the presence of scribes (9.53 ± 0.8) (P = .97). Conclusion: Patient satisfaction with wait times and providers was high overall and was not affected by the presence of a medical scribe.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
某学术耳鼻喉科门诊医疗抄写员对患者满意度的影响
目的:证据表明,抄写员可以提高服务效率和满意度在几个设置,但是否抄写员提高患者满意度是混合的。我们研究了抄写员是否提高了学术耳鼻喉科诊所的患者满意度。方法:作者对2016年12月至2017年12月期间Press Ganey调查的患者反应进行回顾性分析。他们对服务提供者的满意度和等待时间进行了调查。今年有三家供应商与抄写员合作;每个人六个月有抄写员,六个月没有抄写员。作者使用费舍尔精确检验比较了有抄写员和没有抄写员时期的调查结果。使用学生t检验比较平均总体供应商评分。结果:全年共87例患者填写了3家医疗机构的Press Ganey调查问卷,其中无抄写员就诊54例,有抄写员就诊33例。Fischer精确分析显示,对医疗服务提供者的满意度和等待时间在个体医疗服务提供者和所有医疗服务提供者的组合中没有显著差异(均P > 0.05)。患者推荐医生办公室的可能性也没有差异(P = .91)。在没有抄写员的情况下,医生的总体评分(0-10分)较高(9.48±1.06),有抄写员的情况下评分不变(9.53±0.8)(P = 0.97)。结论:患者对等待时间和提供者的满意度总体较高,不受医疗记录员存在的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Pediatric Necrotizing Otitis Externa: A Scoping Review A Reproducible Peritonsillar Abscess Incision and Drainage Model for Junior Trainees Cost-Effectiveness of Diffusion Weighted MRI Versus Planned Second-Look Surgery for Cholesteatoma Assessing ChatGPT’s Responses to Otolaryngology Patient Questions Early and Late Complications of Mandibulectomy Free Flap Reconstruction: Does the Selective Use of Soft Tissue Only Flaps Reduce Complications?
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1