The Use of Medical Scribes in Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review and Future Directions

References

1. 1.↵
   Institute of Medicine, Committee on Patient Safety and Health Information Technology. Key capabilities of an electronic health record system. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2003.
2. 2.↵
   HealthIT.gov. Benefits of electronic health records (EHRs). Available from: http://www.healthit.gov/providers-professionals/benefits-electronic-health-records-ehrs. Accessed July 1, 2014.
3. 3.↵
   Institute of Medicine, Committee on Patient Safety and Health Information Technology. Health IT and patient safety: building safer systems for better care. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2012.
4. 4.↵
   1. Blumenthal D

   . Wiring the health system—origins and provisions of a new federal program. N Engl J Med 2011;365:2323–9.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 5.↵
   1. Hsiao CJ,
   2. Hing E,
   3. Ashman J

   . Trends in electronic health record system use among office-based physicians: United States, 2007–2012. Natl Health Stat Rep 2014;20:1–18.

   OpenUrl
6. 6.↵
   1. DesRoches CM,
   2. Charles D,
   3. Furukawa MF,
   4. et al

   . Adoption of electronic health records grows rapidly, but fewer than half of US hospitals had at least a basic system in 2012. Health Aff 2013;32:1478–85.

   OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
7. 7.↵
   1. Blavin FE,
   2. Buntin MB

   . Forecasting the use of electronic health records: an expert opinion approach. Medicare Medicaid Res Rev 2013;3:E1–16.

   OpenUrlCrossRef
8. 8.↵
   1. Holroyd-Leduc JM,
   2. Lorenzetti D,
   3. Straus SE,
   4. Sykes L,
   5. Quan H

   . The impact of the electronic medical record on structure, process, and outcomes within primary care: a systematic review of the evidence. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2011;18:732–7.

   OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   1. King J,
   2. Patel V,
   3. Jamoom EW,
   4. Furukawa MF

   . Clinical benefits of electronic health record use: national findings. Health Serv Res 2014;49(1 Pt 2):392–404.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
10. 10.↵
    1. Fleming NS,
    2. Becker ER,
    3. Culler SD,
    4. et al

    . The impact of electronic health records on workflow and financial measures in primary care practices. Health Serv Res 2014;49(1 Pt 2):405–20.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. 11.↵
    1. Heisey-Grove D,
    2. Danehy LN,
    3. Consolazio M,
    4. Lynch K,
    5. Mostashari F

    . A national study of challenges to electronic health record adoption and meaningful use. Med Care 2014;52:144–8.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
12. 12.↵
    1. Boonstra A,
    2. Broekhuis M

    . Barriers to the acceptance of electronic medical records by physicians from systematic review to taxonomy and interventions. BMC Health Serv Res 2010;10:1–17.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Friedberg MW,
    2. Chen PG,
    3. Van Busum KR,
    4. et al

    . Research report. Factors affecting physician professional satisfaction and their implications for patient care, health systems, and health policy. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation; 2013. Available from: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR400/RR439/RAND_RR439.pdf. Accessed July 1, 2014.
14. 14.↵
    1. Menachemi N,
    2. Collum TH

    . Benefits and drawbacks of electronic health record systems. Risk Manag Healthc Policy 2011;4:47–55.

    OpenUrlPubMed
15. 15.↵
    1. Makam AN,
    2. Lanham HJ,
    3. Batchelor K,
    4. et al

    . The good, the bad and the early adopters: providers' attitudes about a common, commercial EHR. J Eval Clin Pract 2014;20:36–42.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. Montague E,
    2. Asan O

    . Dynamic modeling of patient and physician eye gaze to understand the effects of electronic health records on doctor-patient communication and attention. Int J Med Inform 2014;83:225–34.

    OpenUrlPubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Asan O,
    2. Montague E

    . Technology-mediated information sharing between patients and clinicians in primary care encounters. Behav Inf Technol 2014;33:259–70.

    OpenUrl
18. 18.↵
    1. Krist AH,
    2. Beasley JW,
    3. Crosson JC,
    4. et al

    . Electronic health record functionality needed to better support primary care. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2014;21:764–71.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    The Joint Commission. Use of unlicensed persons acting as scribes. Revised July 12, 2012. Available from: http://www.jointcommission.org/mobile/standards_information/jcfaqdetails.aspx?StandardsFAQId=426&StandardsFAQChapterId=66. Accessed July 2, 2014.
20. 20.↵
    1. Witt RC,
    2. Haedtler DR

    . Nurse-scribe system saves time in the emergency department. J Emerg Nurs 1975;1:23–7.

    OpenUrlPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Hixon JR

    . Scribe system works like a charm in Sarasota ED. Emerg Dep News 1981;3:4.

    OpenUrlPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Allred RJ,
    2. Ewer S

    . Improved emergency department patient flow: five years of experience with a scribe system. Ann Emerg Med 1983;12:162–3.

    OpenUrlPubMed
23. 23.↵
    Institute of Medicine (US). Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2001.
24. 24.↵
    Google. Google Scholar [About page]. Available from: http://scholar.google.com/intl/en-US/scholar/about.html. Accessed September 9, 2014.
25. 25.↵
    1. Arya R,
    2. Salovich DM,
    3. Ohman-Strickland P,
    4. Merlin MA

    . Impact of scribes on performance indicators in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med 2010;17:490–4.

    OpenUrlPubMed
26. 26.↵
    1. Koshy S,
    2. Feustel PJ,
    3. Hong M,
    4. Kogan BA

    . Scribes in an ambulatory urology practice: patient and physician satisfaction. J Urol 2010;184:258–62.

    OpenUrlPubMed
27. 27.↵
    1. Bank AJ,
    2. Obetz C,
    3. Konrardy A,
    4. et al

    . Impact of scribes on patient interaction, productivity, and revenue in a cardiology clinic: a prospective study. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res 2013;5:399–406.

    OpenUrlPubMed
28. 28.↵
    1. Bastani A,
    2. Shaqiri B,
    3. Palomba K,
    4. Bananno D,
    5. Anderson W

    . An ED scribe program is able to improve throughput time and patient satisfaction. Am J Emerg Med 2014;32:399–402.

    OpenUrlPubMed
29. 29.↵
    1. Allen B,
    2. Banapoor B,
    3. Weeks E,
    4. Payton T

    . An assessment of emergency department throughput and provider satisfaction after the implementation of a scribe program. Adv Emerg Med. 2014;2014:517319.

    OpenUrl
30. 30.
    1. Ebell MH,
    2. Siwek J,
    3. Weiss BD,
    4. et al

    . Strength of recommendation taxonomy (SORT): a patient-centered approach to grading evidence in the medical literature. J Am Board Fam Pract 2004;17:59–67.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
31. 31.↵
    Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. National ambulatory medical care survey: 2010 summary tables. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/ahcd/namcs_summary/2010_namcs_web_tables.pdf. Accessed October 17, 2014.
32. 32.↵
    1. Callahan EJ,
    2. Bertakis KD

    . Development and validation of the Davis Observation Code. Fam Med 1991;23:19–24.

    OpenUrlPubMed
33. 33.↵
    1. Roter D,
    2. Larson S

    . The Roter interaction analysis system (RIAS): utility and flexibility for analysis of medical interactions. Patient Educ Couns 2002;46:243–51.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
34. 34.↵
    1. Laws MB,
    2. Taubin T,
    3. Bezreh T,
    4. Lee Y,
    5. Beach MC,
    6. Wilson IB

    . Problems and processes in medical encounters: the cases method of dialogue analysis. Patient Educ Couns 2013;91:192–9.

    OpenUrlPubMed