Clinical documentation remains a major drain on time and attention, often extending work into evenings and contributing to burnout. A large health network identified note burden as a prime area for improvement after tracking how long clinicians spend writing and editing notes. The organisation sought a scalable alternative to templates, prebuilt phrases, keyboard shortcuts, voice-to-text tools and in-room human scribes, which had mixed results or were not sustainable. By rolling out artificial intelligence-enabled ambient documentation across primary care and multispecialty settings, it reports measurable reductions in documentation time per visit, lower cognitive burden and improved patient experience. Clinicians save 1–2 hours per week, more than 90% report reduced mental load and over 70% report higher patient satisfaction. Many clinics also accommodate 1–3 additional patients daily with patient permission for ambient listening.
Targeting Note Burden with Ambient Documentation
Time in notes is a commonly tracked metric. In one regional primary care group, clinicians spend about 70 minutes per day writing and editing notes, and more than 10% of 800 multispecialty clinicians spend over two hours daily. This workload has been recognised as a significant contributor to burnout and an opportunity to restore focus on patient care. Previous interventions delivered limited relief. Templates and prebuilt phrases tended to lengthen notes without materially cutting effort. Keyboard shortcuts and voice-to-text helped some users but left substantial time at the keyboard. In-room scribes were not financially sustainable at scale, and traditional dictation faded over time.
Must Read: Human-Centred Design to Ease Clinician Burden
Ambient documentation technology takes a different approach by “listening” to the visit via a connected mobile device and generating an initial note that captures relevant history, examination, diagnoses and plan. Earlier versions operated much like remote scribing, but newer tools create a draft within about a minute of the visit’s end for clinician review. The system is trained to separate clinical content from small talk, shifting the clinician’s role from primary author to reviewer and editor. This reduces after-hours work and the need to retain encounter details for later documentation, both major contributors to perceived cognitive load.
Rollout, Workflow Integration and Early Impact
Over roughly six months, the health network deployed ambient documentation to thousands of clinicians who use a mobile extension of the electronic health record. After obtaining patient consent, clinicians allow the system to run in the background so they can focus on direct interaction. Training emphasises clearly stating examination findings and summarising assessment and plan to sharpen accuracy in the generated draft. During wrap-up or shortly after the encounter, clinicians create the note, review it and make edits before moving to the next patient.
Satisfaction increased when users transitioned from remote scribing services to AI-ambient tools, reflecting faster turnaround and at times better initial accuracy. In some groups migrating to a new electronic record, the organisation implemented ambient documentation at scale during go-live. Clinicians responded well to this approach because it reduced the need for personalised templates and shortcut building typically required at go-live. In an ambient model these steps are less necessary, helping establish a new standard for visit completion during periods of change and enabling teams to make full use of concentrated go-live support.
Operational effects align with the organisation’s broader expectations. Measured documentation time per visit decreased by one to two minutes, which adds up to 1–2 hours saved per week for most users. Subjective survey responses estimate six minutes saved per note, indicating that perceived benefits exceed observed time reductions, likely due to less mental load and reduced need to recall details later. More than 90% of clinicians report lower cognitive burden. Patient experience appears to improve as clinicians spend more time face to face and less time at the keyboard; more than 70% of clinicians report increases in patient satisfaction. Patient-reported satisfaction scores have also risen anecdotally among clinicians who adopt ambient documentation. Although not required, many clinicians see more patients per clinic day, with most clinics typically accommodating 1–3 additional patients daily. Use remains contingent on patient permission.
Implementation Lessons, Risks and the Path to Voice-Centric Workflows
The experience highlights both the promise and practicalities of scaling ambient documentation. Human oversight is essential. Clinicians remain responsible for their notes, so routine review and editing underpin accuracy and trust. Setting expectations during adoption helps teams calibrate strengths and limitations. Occasional connectivity or processing issues may temporarily halt the service or delay output. Rapid communication and feedback channels, along with robust downtime alternatives, help sustain confidence when outages occur.
Device management becomes more complex when programmes rely on business-owned hardware. Costs increase, and configuring security requirements such as multifactor authentication can require clinician time and at-the-elbow support. As adoption grows, pressure mounts to modify standard templates, workflows and processes. Intake, rooming and templated documentation may need adjustment to avoid duplication as ambient tools become embedded in the record. These operational shifts are part of a broader evolution toward voice-centric user interfaces for clinical systems.
That evolution is accelerating. Tasks such as ordering tests, adjusting medications, placing referrals, requesting result summaries, setting follow-up ticklers and scheduling are already live in some settings or rapidly becoming available as ambient tools integrate more deeply with clinical workflows. Introducing ambient documentation during major platform transitions can be a useful catalyst, reducing the establishment of workarounds that ambient tools may render unnecessary. Across varied implementation paths, success hinges on patient consent, clinician training and governance that keeps humans in the loop while technology matures.
Ambient documentation offers a pragmatic route to lower note burden, ease cognitive load and enhance the patient encounter without ceding clinician control. Documented time per visit falls by one to two minutes, weekly savings reach 1–2 hours, and most clinicians report better experiences for themselves and their patients. With more than 90% citing reduced mental load and over 70% reporting higher patient satisfaction, many clinics can also accommodate 1–3 extra patients per day. Effective scaling depends on clear consent processes, reliable technical support, thoughtful device and security planning and continued human oversight. Ambient scribing provides a foundation for more natural interactions that prioritise patient engagement while maintaining documentation quality.
Source: Healthcare IT News
Image Credit: iStock
