I see schools, both online and real-world, advertising training courses in medical transcription, that specialised skill of turning doctors’ recorded gibberish into text medical records. As this profession seems to fit my interests, skills and experience, I’m strongly considering signing up for the best online course. Medium big bucks but a substantial, steady income for the rest of my working life.
Or is it?
I also see advertisements for speech recognition software tailored for medical transcription. The software claims to be highly accurate, requiring only minor, cursory editing to create the finished records and, therefore, enables medical offices to dispense with the expensive, highly-trained professional transcriptionists.
So, which is it? A viable profession for years to come or one about to be wiped out by the advance of technology? Are there any transcriptionists or doctors or nurses out there who might have some input on this question?
We use speech recognition technology a lot around here.
ALL our medical imaging reports.
ALL our pathology reports.
Many docs dictating into such systems thereby bypassing the transcriptionist.
And, this is only recently - none of these systems existed in our hospital until about 18 months ago. Just imagine what things will be like in five years. In ten years!
I think you can read the writing on the wall.
(btw, I still like typing my own consult notes if time permits - makes for a much more flowing and thoughtful letter)
Though I know nothing about the field itself, it seems to me that it would be easily subject both replacement by technology (as KarlGauss notes) and to outsourcing to a low-wage country sometime in the relatively near future.
Recently, my wife needed a CAT scan taken at night while she was in the emergency room of a hospital (she’s fine, thanks, the scan showed it was not a blood clot), and they sent the results to Australia to be reviewed. If they can do that now with CAT scan results, they can no doubt send medical dictation anywhere in the world to be transcribed once transcriptionists can be trained.
As a physician and Medical Informaticist, it’s my job to use and recommend large software systems for Hospitals and Clinics.
First, speech recognition is finally coming into its own. I use Dragon 9 Medical in my demonstrations and it’s pretty darn good. The two things that drive it are economics and turn-around time. In specialty areas at my home hospital (Diagnostic Imaging, ED, Pathology) the use of speech recognition eliminates the lag time between dictation and transcription. Industry wide this has been a slow adoption curve but my personal guess is that the combination of improved software and robust hardware platforms is near the tipping point.
Second, the industry is driving toward the increasing use of structured information instead of free text, for various reasons.
Third, transcription is easily outsourced to third world countries.
Finally, although it can be done from home, it is not a very high-paying field.
For the next 5 or 10 years there is going to be some demand. It will be a diminishing demand as the above factors plus economics come into play. I don’t see it as a good choice for a new career.
A friend of mine used to make a decent amount of money transcribing medical records at home. She’d pick up the tapes & deliver the results. The money coming in suited her situation–although there were no benefits, etc.
Her clients now use transcriptionists in India. She found an administrative job in the Texas Medical Center. (Lots of medical-related work here in Houston.)
Looks as though speech recognition software will eventually put most transcriptionists out of work.
lbgwyn66,
While it would appear that coding would be going down that same path, it probably isn’t. My small medical facility uses an automated coding system, but we have 2 coding auditors on staff. They’re always finding either errors in coding or suboptimal coding of patient visits. And, if you were wondering, they were hired about the time the new system arrived. Their positions did not exist prior to the new system.
I don’t forsee this field disappearing for a while. Besides the HIPAA issues (I’m waiting for a xenophobic congressman to clamp down on overseas transcriptionists) making overseas remote coding auditing a less attractive proposition, this requires quite a good grasp of the English language to catch the subtleties needed to see coding “opportunities.”
I guess the need to discuss these issues with the providers directly also weighs against overseas remote coding to low-cost countries. Explaining coding error is not something that can be done in a canned e-mail. It has to be explained verbally; coding, it seems, is not something many providers waste a lot of memory on. In my experience, most providers are pretty hostile to the whole coding concept because it adds work that doesn’t appear to help patients. Then, having to talk to someone who has a thick accent about that unpleasant part of their jobs? I can foresee them hitting the roofs. I see them hitting the roofs over much smaller things now.
So I’d guess doing some coding training geared toward auditing may have value for a few years. That’s just my opinion. Let’s see what others think.