Computer-generated patient histories are more thorough, organized, and useful than physician-written histories.
Computer-generated history of present illnesses (HPIs) are more effective at collecting information about patients than are HPIs written by physicians during usual care in gastrointestinal (GI) clinics, according to a study published in the American Journal of Gastroenterology.
Researchers from Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, CA performed a cross-sectional study to compare the quality of computer-generated (Automated Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Symptoms [AEGIS]) versus physician-documented HPIs in outpatient adult GI clinics.
Seventy-five patients were identified for the study. The patients reported a variety of symptoms, including abdominal pain, heartburn, reflux, nausea, vomiting, constipation, and diarrhea. The physicians initially entered the patient history data into the electronic health record (typing or dictation). The patients then subsequently completed AEGIS on a website called My GI Health.
Forty-eight blinded physicians also participated in the study. Using five-point scales, they assessed HPI quality across six domains:
1. Overall impression
2. Thoroughness
3. Usefulness
4. Organization
5. Succinctness
6. Comprehensibility
The findings showed that the mean overall impression score for computer-generated HPIs was higher than physician HPIs (3.68 versus 2.80), even after adjusting for physician and visit type, location, mode of transcription, and demographics. Computer-generated HPIs were also judged more complete (3.70 versus 2.73), more useful (3.82 versus 3.04), better organized (3.66 versus 2.80), more succinct (3.55 versus 3.17, and more comprehensible (3.66 versus 2.97).
"The computer-generated narratives were of higher quality overall," lead author Christopher V. Almario, MD, gastroenterology fellow, Cedars-Sinai, said in a release.
The researchers said that computers offer a solution to the problem of doctors entering incomplete or inaccurate information into patients' records. They also noted that the technology also frees physicians to focus more on patients during office visits and to catch important bits of information and nonverbal cues that might otherwise be missed.
A Victory for Radiology: New CMS Proposal Would Provide Coverage of CT Colonography in 2025
July 12th 2024In newly issued proposals addressing changes to coverage for Medicare services in 2025, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announced its intent to provide coverage of computed tomography colonography (CTC) for Medicare beneficiaries in 2025.
The Reading Room: Artificial Intelligence: What RSNA 2020 Offered, and What 2021 Could Bring
December 5th 2020Nina Kottler, M.D., chief medical officer of AI at Radiology Partners, discusses, during RSNA 2020, what new developments the annual meeting provided about these technologies, sessions to access, and what to expect in the coming year.
ACR Collaborative Model Leads to 35 Percent Improvement with Mammography Positioning Criteria
July 1st 2024Noting significant variation with facilities for achieving passing criteria for mammography positioning, researchers found that structured interventions, ranging from weekly auditing of images taken by technologists to mechanisms for feedback from radiologists to technologists, led to significant improvements in a multicenter study.
New Study Shows Non-Radiologists Interpreting 28 Percent of Imaging for Medicare Patients
June 28th 2024While radiologists interpreted approximately 99 percent of all non-cardiac CT, MRI and nuclear medicine studies in hospital and emergency department settings for Medicare beneficiaries, new research shows significantly less radiologist review of cardiac imaging and office-based imaging.