Introduction Operation reports of panendoscopies in otolaryngology are usually created as free text reports (FTR) by the examiner himself, or dictated and then written by non-medical staff members before final review. Report quality and time needed can substantially differ with respect to examiner´s individual level of experience. Taking into account the growing work intensification, new time-efficient and quality-assuring solutions are of greatest importance. Aim of the study was to compare report quality and time needed of FTR with digital structured reports (SR).
Materials and Methods Ten patients were examined by three otolaryngologists who completed their operation reports using both FTR as well as a SR by using a net-based structured reporting template. Results of both modalities were evaluated in terms of report completeness and time needed by two independent otolaryngologists.
Results Report completeness of FTR and SR were comparable (93.3 % vs. 91.8 %, p > 0.05).Time efficiency was significantly better when using SR in comparison to FTR including dictation, staff writing and final review (279s ± 93s vs. 548s ± 112s, p<0.001). Additionally, SR showed a high degree of user satisfaction (VAS 7.9 vs. 5.8, p<0.05).
Conclusion SR can increase time-efficacy and user satisfaction in the reporting-workflow of panendoscopies in otolaryngology without compromising report quality. Furthermore, gathered data can be used for statistical analysis. SR could therefore be a new tool for process optimization in head and neck surgery.
Poster-PDF
A-1843.PDF
