PURPOSE: A study was performed to compare the performance of automatic speech recognition (ASR) with conventional transcription. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 100 CT reports were generated by using ASR and 100 CT reports were dictated and written by medical transcriptionists. The time for dictation and correction of errors by the radiologist was assessed and the type of mistakes was analysed. The text recognition rate was calculated in both groups and the average time between completion of the imaging study by the technologist and generation of the written report was assessed. A commercially available speech recognition technology (ASKA Software, IBM ViaVoice) running on a personal computer was used. RESULTS: The time for the dictation using digital voice recognition was 9.4 +/- 2.3 min compared to 4.5 +/- 3.6 min with an ordinary Dictaphone. The text recognition rate was 97% with digital voice recognition and 99% with medical transcriptionists. The average time from imaging completion to written report finalization was reduced from 47.3 hours with medical transcriptionists to 12.7 hours with ASR. The analysis of misspellings demonstrated (ASR vs. medical transcriptionists): 3 vs. 4 for syntax errors, 0 vs. 37 orthographic mistakes, 16 vs. 22 mistakes in substance and 47 vs. erroneously applied terms. CONCLUSIONS: The use of digital voice recognition as a replacement for medical transcription is recommendable when an immediate availability of written reports is necessary.     «

PURPOSE: A study was performed to compare the performance of automatic speech recognition (ASR) with conventional transcription. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 100 CT reports were generated by using ASR and 100 CT reports were dictated and written by medical transcriptionists. The time for dictation and correction of errors by the radiologist was assessed and the type of mistakes was analysed. The text recognition rate was calculated in both groups and the average time between completion of the imaging...     »