Enhancing Nursing Practice by Utilizing Voice Recognition for Direct Documentation

Abstract

Innovative strategies that preserve nursing time for direct patient care activities are needed. This study examined the utility, feasibility, and acceptability of voice recognition (VR) software to document nursing care and patient outcomes in an electronic health record in a simulated nursing care environment. A phase 1 trial included 5 iterative experiments with observations and nurse participant feedback to allow enhancements to the speech detection capabilities and refinement of the technology, software, and processes. Utility ratings improved over time; however, interference on nursing care remained a concern throughout. Nurse participants favored keyboard entry electronic health record, largely due to software and technical issues, but also relative to the culture shift the new technology brings to nursing practice. Successful adoption of VR technology by nursing will be dependent on receptiveness of the nurses and perceived benefits, timely access to education and training, and minimization of barriers to using the software.

Nurses' experiences and viewpoints about the benefits of adopting information technology in health care: A qualitative study

“…It is noteworthy that IT adoption can be reinforced by facilitating factors such as minimizing nursesd iscomfort about IT, exploring and understanding nurses´ experience about the benefits of integrating IT to their practice [6,10]. On the other hand, the literature showed that IT adoption varies greatly among different types of organizations and countries and is also affected by cultural, socio-organizational factors, and demographic features such as hospital size, type of hospital (whether it is educational or not), ownership, location or area (urban or rural), budget, IT staff, and awareness of the benefits of IT [11][12][13].…”

The impact of implementing speech recognition technology on the accuracy and efficiency (time to complete) clinical documentation by nurses: A systematic review

“…As depicted in the combined search PRISMA flow diagram (Figure 1), the search results identified 10 studies, which were deemed appropriate for inclusion in this systematic review. Following the rigorous quality appraisal, six studies met with the validity criterion (Alapetite, 2008; Fratzke et al, 2014; NSLHD, 2012; Saxena et al, 2018; Suominen et al, 2014; Suominen, Zhou, Hanlen, & Ferraro, 2015). Despite poor validity, studies by Awan et al, (2018), Chang, Sheng, Sang, and Wang (2008), Carter‐Wesley (2009), and Marukami et al, (2010) were included in critical appraisal in this review for their potential to yield valuable insight towards the primary and secondary outcomes.…”

“…Six studies scored >75% validity, namely Alapetite (2008), Fratzke et al (2014), NSLHD (2012), Saxena et al (2018), Suominen et al (2015), and Suominen et al (2014). Therefore, conclusions from these studies seemed generalisable.…”

“…Six studies were conducted in simulated clinical settings (Alapetite, 2008; Awan et al, 2018; Carter‐Wesley, 2009; Fratzke et al, 2014; Suominen et al, 2014, 2015). Notably, Alapetite (2007) conducted their study within a simulated hospital operating room environment, while the other six studies were conducted in simulated medical settings.…”

“…Thus, in addition to or instead of the keyboard, speech can now be used as an input modality for data entry. Though widely used in general medical transcription, radiology, pathology and other areas since the 1980s, the technology has been introduced into nursing only around the last decade (Fratzke et al, 2014). The introduction of SRT for nurses remains potentially significant because of the amount of time it could save in implementing point‐of‐care documentation.…”