Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T04:46:43.583Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cost-effectiveness analysis of medical documentation alternatives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 March 2005

Renata Kopach ,
Somayeh Sadat ,
Ian D. Gallaway ,
Glen Geiger ,
Wendy J. Ungar  and
Peter C. Coyte
Renata Kopach
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
Somayeh Sadat
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
Ian D. Gallaway
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
Glen Geiger
Affiliation:
University of Toronto and Sunnybrook and Women's College Health Science Centre
Wendy J. Ungar
Affiliation:
University of Toronto and The Hospital for Sick Children
Peter C. Coyte
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: The delay between patient discharge and the completion of the final discharge note have prompted hospitals to consider new information technologies. This study compared the relative cost-effectiveness of an automated medical documentation system to the current system in place at a Canadian hospital. There are significant expenditures associated with the choice of medical documentation system, yet the benefit to the patient population has not been studied.

Methods: A systematic review of the literature was carried out. Cost data for the current documentation system were obtained from the study hospital. The costs of purchasing the automated system were obtained from the manufacturer. Other resource cost implications of the automated system were estimated based on information obtained from the Centre for Applied Health Informatics at the study hospital. The outcome was determined to be the average time (days) between patient discharge and note completion. A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted. Sensitivity analyses were used to determine the robustness of the results.

Results: The automated documentation system was associated with higher costs but better outcomes than the current system. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio used for comparing the automated medical documentation system with the traditional system indicated that the incremental daily cost for decreasing a day in average note completion time per discharge note was 0.331 Canadian $/day over the study period (4 years).

Conclusions: Although the automated documentation system was more expensive than the current system, it also provided qualitative benefits that were not considered in the cost-effectiveness analysis.

Keywords

Cost-effectiveness analysisTechnology assessmentComputerized patient medical records
Type
RESEARCH REPORTS
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , January 2005 , pp. 126 - 131
Copyright
© 2005 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ball MJ. 1995. Healthcare information management systems: A practical guide. 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag;
Chan SY, Ohlmann J, Dunbar S, et al. 2002 Operations research methods applied to workflow in a medical records department. Health Care Manag Sci. 5: 191– 199.Google Scholar
Drummond MF. 1997. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press;
Essex D. 1999 Taking dictation into the 21st century. Healthc Inform. 16: 61– 65.Google Scholar
Henricks WH, Roumina K, Skilton BE, Ozan DJ, Goss GR. 2002 The utility and cost effectiveness of voice recognition technology in surgical pathology. Mod Pathol. 15: 565– 571.Google Scholar
Leland T, Blank AJ. 1989. Engineering economics. New York: McGraw-Hill;
van Walraven C, Laupacis A, Seth R, Wells G. 1999 Dictated versus database-generated discharge summaries: A randomized clinical trial. Canad Med Assoc J. 160: 319– 326.Google Scholar
Zafar A, Overhage JM, McDonald CJ. 1999 Continuous speech recognition for clinicians. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 6: 195– 204.Google Scholar