Saving 11 minutes per encounter

What does “Saving 11 minutes per encounter” mean?

In early FaceMed.ai testing, 10+ participating physicians estimated an average saving of 11 minutes per encounter across history-taking and documentation. Their estimates accounted for time spent reviewing and correcting the generated notes.

The figure describes physician feedback from early testing. It is an average estimate, not an independently timed measurement, a minimum saving or a guarantee for every encounter. The physicians and clinics remain confidential.

Why does the scope include history-taking?

Emily talks with patients before the encounter, using questions defined by the practice’s physicians, and prepares intake notes for review. That workflow addresses both gathering the information and documenting it. The physician still confirms important details, applies clinical judgment and completes the encounter.

An ambient scribe primarily documents a conversation in which the clinician is already participating. This difference in workflow explains what each measure needs to include; it does not establish that one product will save more time than another.

How does an estimate differ from a timed study?

A physician estimate captures the participant’s perception of the work avoided and the effort that remains. Direct timing records task duration, while EHR activity logs capture activity within the measured system. Each method answers a somewhat different question.

AHRQ’s health IT evaluation toolkit provides approaches for selecting and collecting measures appropriate to an implementation. [1] For a local evaluation, state the method, task boundaries, sample and visit mix so the result can be interpreted.

This page does not establish an encounter count, specialty-specific result, distribution of physician estimates or confidence interval. Those details should not be inferred from “10+ physicians” or from the reported average.

Can the estimate be compared with published scribe results?

Not as a direct performance comparison. Studies may measure time inside the EHR, note writing per appointment or documentation time per clinical day. They also differ in participants, workflow, baseline and measurement method.

The research comparison guide explains published findings and their endpoints. Do not subtract a scribe study’s number from 11 minutes to calculate an additional FaceMed.ai benefit.

How should a practice test its own savings?

1. Define the current workload. Record physician time for gathering and documenting the history for selected visit types.
2. Measure the complete new workflow. Include reading the report, asking remaining questions, correcting notes and completing the record.
3. Keep other work visible. Record staff support, patient effort and record transfer separately; do not assume they are included in the published estimate.
4. Include ordinary variation. Track incomplete intakes, different visit types and encounters where the report is not used.
5. Report the result with its method. Identify whether it is timed, log-derived or estimated, and include the number of encounters reviewed.

Use the printable evaluation worksheet to record the result. Translate recovered minutes into more patient attention, less after-hours work or additional capacity only when your practice’s measured workflow supports that use.