Verbatim Transcription

A run-on sentence. A misspelled drug. A superfluous comma. Heck, maybe even a split infinitive. Dictation errors can irk word-wary MTs, but should they be forced to overlook such grammatical offenses? Thus begins the debate over verbatim transcription, a contractual item that makes MTs withhold all judgment — medical, grammatical or otherwise — and simply type what the dictator says. The controversial practice pits risk management against quality assurance (QA), but MTs’ reputations and patient care are what’s on the line.

While traditional transcription lets MTs correct punctuation, misspellings and dictation errors at their discretion, verbatim transcription requires MTs to transcribe notes exactly as dictated. The practice is usually based on the client’s preferences; if a doctor doesn’t want his words altered, the MT is expected to transcribe word-for-word. There are arguments for and against the no-edits approach, but most MTs aren’t thrilled about it.

The running joke is, “If you want verbatim transcription, I will put in every ‘uh,’ ‘ah,’ ‘oh’ and ‘um’ that you have dictated,” said Barb Marques, CMT, AHDI-F, president-elect of the Association for Healthcare Documentation Integrity (AHDI).

In reality, it’s no laughing matter.

Risky Business

Doctors can make mistakes, so risk managers champion verbatim transcription as a way to keep MTs from taking the fall, according to Donna Brosmer, CMT, AHDI-F, NREMT-B, quality officer, Spheris. If the document ends up in court, an MT can claim no culpability because the doctor requested the dictation be transcribed word for word. If the MT changed any words, he or she might be held accountable for the error - a mark hospitals and medical transcription service organizations (MTSOs) don’t want on their hands. Read More Medical Transcription