I haven't been instructed from STAT to omit anything that would - YBOAH, sm Posted: Jun 4th, 2021 - 9:36 pm In Reply to: Exactly - Totally crazy
that would compromise patient care. A lot of acronyms are asked for and redundancy be left out, such as if the chief complaint was given and then the history started with the same thing. It's duplicate information and not necessary to the report and certainly not compromising patient care. It would seem logical that the provider has requested this type of transcription so they do not have to pay as much for the reports, not that the company just took it upon themselves. I mean they are making their money from what I'm typing, so yeah, they would want me to be productive. Certainly the providers would know what they have dictated and what they have not, and it would be quite simple for a provider to verify since it is all recorded. Unfortunately, it does make it harder as a transcriptionist to decipher for sure what is what, but it doesn't have to be that hard. It's not unlike some providers wanting a patient name in a report and some do not, the guidelines from the providers. As I said though, it is not going to pay the mortgage payment. And yes, it can drive you crazy typing the same crappy physician until you're done with your day. I do like the mix of good dictators and bad dictators. It evens out your day. Having a fair amount of minutes of the same crappy doctor is exhausting. I just put in the blanks and move on. I don't spend that much time over a blank with some of these guys. Most of the time, the QA person cannot understand it either.
Post A Reply Reply By Email Options
Complete Discussion Below: (  marks the location of current message within thread)
|
