• Logo
  • HamaraJournals

Accuracy of Speech Recognition System’s Medical Report and Physicians' Experience in Hospitals

Zahra Karbasi, Kambiz Bahaadinbeigy, Leila Ahmadian, Reza Khajouei, Moghaddameh Mirzaee
39

Views


Abstract

Introduction: Speech recognition(SR) technology has been existing for more than two decades. But, it has been rarely used in health care institutions and not applied uniformly in all the clinical domains. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of speech recognition system in four different situations in the real environment of health services. We also report physicians' experience of using speech recognition technology.

Method:. To do this study, NEVISA SR software professional v.3 was installed on the computers of expert physicians. The pre-designated medical report was tested by the physicians in four different modes including slow expression in a silent environment, slow expression in crowded environments, rapid expression in a silent environment and rapid expression in a busy environment.  After using the speech recognition software by 15 physicians in hospitals, a designed questionnaire was distributed among them. .

Results: The results showed that the highest average accuracy of speech recognition software was in the silent environment by slow expression and the minimum average accuracy was in the busy environment by rapid expression. Of all the participants in the study, 53.3% of the physicians believed that the use of speech recognition system promoted the workflow.

Conclusion: We found that software accuracy was generally higher than the expectation and its use required to upgrade the system and its operation.  In order to achieve the highest level of recognition rate and error reduction by speech recognition, influential factors such as environmental noise, type of software or hardware, training and experience of participants can be also considered.


References

Hodgson T, Coiera E. Risks and benefits of speech recognition for clinical documentation: A systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2016; 23(e1): e169-79. PMID: 26578226 DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocv152

Kang HP, Sirintrapun SJ, Nestler RJ, Parwani AV. Experience with voice recognition in surgical pathology at a large academic multi-institutional center. Am J Clin Pathol. 2010 Jan;133(1):156-9. PMID: 20023272 DOI: 10.1309/AJCPOI5F1LPSLZKP

Parente R, Kock N, Sonsini J. An analysis of the implementation and impact of speech-recognition technology in the healthcare sector. Perspect Health Inf Manag. 2004; 1: 5-28. PMID: 18066385

Ramaswamy MR, Chaljub G, Esch O, Fanning DD, vanSonnenberg E. Continuous speech recognition in MR imaging reporting: advantages, disadvantages, and impact. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000; 174(3): 617-22. PMID: 10701598 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.174.3.1740617

Du Toit J, Hattingh R, Pitcher R. The accuracy of radiology speech recognition reports in a multilingual South African teaching hospital. BMC Med Imaging. 2015; 15: 8-13. PMID: 25879906 DOI: 10.1186/s12880-015-0048-1

Clarke MA, King JL, Kim MS. Toward successful implementation of speech recognition technology: A survey of SRT utilization issues in healthcare settings. South Med J. 2015 Jul;108(7):445-51. PMID: 26192944 DOI: 10.14423/SMJ.0000000000000302

Basma S, Lord B, Jacks LM, Rizk M, Scaranelo AM. Error rates in breast imaging reports: comparison of automatic speech recognition and dictation transcription. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011; 197(4): 923-7. PMID: 21940580 DOI: 10.2214/AJR.11.6691

Derman YD, Arenovich T, Strauss J. Speech recognition software and electronic psychiatric progress notes: physicians' ratings and preferences. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2010; 10: 44-51. PMID: 20738875 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-10-44

Zick RG, Olsen J. Voice recognition software versus a traditional transcription service for physician charting in the ED. Am J Emerg Med. 2001; 19(4): 295-8. PMID: 11447517 DOI: 10.1053/ajem.2001.24487

Pezzullo JA, Tung GA, Rogg JM, Davis LM, Brody JM, Mayo-Smith WW. Voice recognition dictation: radiologist as transcriptionist. J Digit Imaging. 2008; 21(4): 384-9. PMID: 17554582 DOI: 10.1007/s10278-007-9039-2

McGurk S, Brauer K, Macfarlane T, Duncan K. The effect of voice recognition software on comparative error rates in radiology reports. Br J Radiol. 2008; 81(970): 767-70. PMID: 18628322 DOI: 10.1259/bjr/20698753

Smith NT, Brien RA, Pettus DC, Jones BR, Quinn ML, Sarnat A. Recognition accuracy with a voice-recognition system designed for anesthesia record keeping. Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing. 1990; 6(4): 299-306.

Alapetite A. Impact of noise and other factors on speech recognition in anaesthesia. Int J Med Inform. 2008; 77(1): 68-77. PMID: 17194621 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2006.11.007

Issenman RM, Jaffer IH. Use of voice recognition software in an outpatient pediatric specialty practice. Pediatrics. 2004; 114(3): e290-3. PMID: 15342888 DOI: 10.1542/peds.2003-0724-L

Kanal KM, Hangiandreou NJ, Sykes A-M, Eklund HE, Araoz PA, Leon JA, et al. Initial evaluation of a continuous speech recognition program for radiology. J Digit Imaging. 2001; 14(1): 30-7. PMID: 11310913 DOI: 10.1007/s10278-001-0022-z

Al-Aynati MM, Chorneyko KA. Comparison of voice-automated transcription and human transcription in generating pathology reports. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2003; 127(6): 721-5. PMID: 12741898 DOI: 10.1043/1543-2165(2003)127<721:COVTAH> 2.0.CO;2

Vorbeck F, Ba-Ssalamah A, Kettenbach J, Huebsch P. Report generation using digital speech recognition in radiology. Eur Radiol. 2000; 10(12): 1976-82. PMID: 11305581 DOI: 10.1007/s003300000459

Mohr DN, Turner DW, Pond GR, Kamath JS, De Vos CB, Carpenter PC. Speech recognition as a transcription aid: A randomized comparison with standard transcription. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2003; 10(1): 85–93. PMID: 12509359 DOI: 10.1197/jamia.M1130

Zemmel NJ, Park SM, Schweitzer J, O'Keefe JS, Laughon MM, Edlich RF. Status of voicetype dictation for windows for the emergency physician. J Emerg Med. 1996; 14(4): 511-5. PMID: 8842928

Detmer WM, Shiffman S, Wyatt JC, Friedman CP, Lane CD, Fagan LM. A continuous-speech interface to a decision support system: II. An evaluation using a Wizard-of-Oz experimental paradigm. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1995; 2(1): 46-57. PMID: 7895136 DOI: 10.1136/jamia.1995.95202548

Singh M, Pal TR. Voice recognition technology implementation in surgical pathology: advantages and limitations. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2011; 135(11): 1476-81. PMID: 22032576 DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2010-0714-OA

Ben B, Whiting SO. Speech recognition 2008. Healthcare Quarterly (Toronto, Ont). 2008; 11(4): 99-101.

Callaway EC, Sweet CF, Siegel E, Reiser JM, Beall DP. Speech recognition interface to a hospital information system using a self-designed visual basic program: Initial experience. Journal of Digital Imaging. 2002; 15(1): 43-53.

Koivikko MP, Kauppinen T, Ahovuo J. Improvement of report workflow and productivity using speech recognition: A follow-up study. J Digit Imaging. 2008; 21(4): 378-82. PMID: 18437491 DOI: 10.1007/s10278-008-9121-4

Lyons JP, Sanders SA, Fredrick Cesene D, Palmer C, Mihalik VL, Weigel T. Speech recognition acceptance by physicians: A temporal replication of a survey of expectations and experiences. Health Informatics J. 2016; 22(3): 768-78. PMID: 26187989 DOI: 10.1177/1460458215589600




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30699/fhi.v8i1.199

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.