Electronic templates versus dictation for the completion of Mohs micrographic surgery operative notes

Abstract

Background: Operative notes can be generated electronically by manual input of the entire note, free-form oral dictation, or using either an electronic template or a template for dictation. There are few studies that have directly compared these modalities in terms of speed, accuracy, and completeness.

Objective: The objective was to determine whether electronic templates are more efficient and reduce errors compared to free-form oral dictation for the completion of Mohs micrographic surgery operative notes.

Methods: Operative notes for 110 consecutive Mohs micrographic surgery cases were completed either by oral dictation or by electronic template. The time to dictate or complete the template was recorded for each note. Notes were subsequently edited, recording the number and type of errors as well as the time required to edit each note.

Results: Compared with dictation, operative notes completed with the electronic template had fewer errors (5.8% vs. 81%), took less time to complete (175.5 seconds vs. 240.0 seconds), took less time to review and edit (41.6 seconds vs. 201.1 seconds), and were completed and signed in a more timely fashion (0.115 days vs. 20.7 days).

Conclusion: Electronic templates are a more accurate and rapid method compared to free-form oral dictation for the completion of Mohs micrographic surgery operative notes and have the advantage of being immediately available to review and sign.