BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the impact of utilizing medical scribes on clinic workflow, physician professional satisfaction, and patient satisfaction in rheumatology and endocrinology clinics. METHODS: We conducted a within-practice pilot study of medical scribes that included a 6-week intervention phase (documentation assistance by medical scribes) followed by a control phase (usual documentation with no assistance) in outpatient rheumatology and endocrinology clinics at an academic medical center. We evaluated the following outcomes: physician professional satisfaction (range, 5-25, with higher values denoting higher satisfaction), autonomy (range, 4-16, with higher values denoting higher autonomy), perception of clinic workflow (range, 1 = calm, 5 = chaotic), and patient satisfaction (5-point Likert item, anchors: strongly agree, strongly disagree). RESULTS: Six physicians, including 3 rheumatologists and 3 endocrinologists, and 496 patients nested within their practices participated. The use of a medical scribe was not associated with physician professional satisfaction (18.17 [SD, 2.9] vs. 17.83 [SD, 1.94], not statistically significant), perception of clinic workflow (2.50 [SD, 0.84] vs. 3.17 [SD, 0.75], not statistically significant), or autonomy (8.67 [SD, 3.44] vs. 8.83 [SD, 3.06], not statistically significant). Physicians had an overall favorable view of the medical scribes program and perceived that documentation support provided by scribes was useful and easy to use and had a positive impact on their clinic workflow. Patient satisfaction was high during the intervention phase (99.4% strongly agree/agree) but not significantly different than in the control phase. CONCLUSIONS: Rheumatologists, endocrinologists, and their patients had consistently positive views regarding the use of a medical scribe without an observed negative effect on clinic workflow in outpatient clinics.
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the impact of utilizing medical scribes on clinic workflow, physician professional satisfaction, and patient satisfaction in rheumatology and endocrinology clinics. METHODS: We conducted a within-practice pilot study of medical scribes that included a 6-week intervention phase (documentation assistance by medical scribes) followed by a control phase (usual documentation with no assistance) in outpatientrheumatology and endocrinology clinics at an academic medical center. We evaluated the following outcomes: physician professional satisfaction (range, 5-25, with higher values denoting higher satisfaction), autonomy (range, 4-16, with higher values denoting higher autonomy), perception of clinic workflow (range, 1 = calm, 5 = chaotic), and patient satisfaction (5-point Likert item, anchors: strongly agree, strongly disagree). RESULTS: Six physicians, including 3 rheumatologists and 3 endocrinologists, and 496 patients nested within their practices participated. The use of a medical scribe was not associated with physician professional satisfaction (18.17 [SD, 2.9] vs. 17.83 [SD, 1.94], not statistically significant), perception of clinic workflow (2.50 [SD, 0.84] vs. 3.17 [SD, 0.75], not statistically significant), or autonomy (8.67 [SD, 3.44] vs. 8.83 [SD, 3.06], not statistically significant). Physicians had an overall favorable view of the medical scribes program and perceived that documentation support provided by scribes was useful and easy to use and had a positive impact on their clinic workflow. Patient satisfaction was high during the intervention phase (99.4% strongly agree/agree) but not significantly different than in the control phase. CONCLUSIONS: Rheumatologists, endocrinologists, and their patients had consistently positive views regarding the use of a medical scribe without an observed negative effect on clinic workflow in outpatient clinics.