ABSTRACT
Objective This study assessed the effects of an ambient artificial intelligence (AI) documentation platform on clinicians’ perceptions of documentation workflow.
Materials and Methods A pre- and post-implementation survey evaluated ambulatory clinician perceptions on impact of Abridge, an ambient AI documentation platform. Outcomes included clinical documentation burden, work after-hours, clinician burnout, work satisfaction, and patient access. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and proportional odds logistic regression to compare changes for concordant questions across pre- and post-surveys. Covariate analysis examined effect of specialty type and duration of use of the AI tool.
Results Survey response rates were 51.1% (94/181) pre-implementation and 75.9% (101/133) post-implementation. Clinician perception of ease of documentation workflow (OR = 6.91, 95% CI: 3.90 to 12.56, p<0.001) and in completing notes associated with usage of the AI tool (OR = 4.95, 95% CI: 2.87 to 8.69, p<0.001) was significantly improved. The majority of respondents agreed that the AI tool decreased documentation burden, decreased the time spent documenting outside clinical hours, reduced burnout risk, and increased job satisfaction, with 48% agreeing that an additional patient could be seen if needed. Clinician specialty type and number of days using the AI tool did not significantly affect survey responses.
Discussion Clinician experience and efficiency was dramatically improved with use of Abridge across a breadth of specialties.
Conclusion An ambient AI documentation platform had tremendous impact on improving clinician experience within a short time frame. Future studies should utilize validated instruments for clinician efficiency and burnout and compare impact across AI platforms.
Competing Interest Statement
The primary and senior authors have no competing interests. One of the authors (Tina Shah, MD, MPH) is Chief Clinical Officer for Abridge and assisted with the review and authorship of this manuscript.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The IRB of the University of Kansas Medical Center waived ethical approval for this work
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Authors list order of authors.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study that are not included in the manuscript are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
