Two hot-button issues on most medical transcription message boards are voice recognition software, and outsourcing to India. Let me explain a little further…
Voice Recognition Concerns:
As you probably know, voice recognition software can recognize the human voice and print out whatever is said onto a computer's word processing program. Such software would seem to be the perfect solution for busy doctors who want to save the step of having a professional medical transcriptionist listen to the dictation and type it out.
However, voice recognition software isn't close to being universally adopted. It takes time to "train" the software to the particular doctor's voice. Many doctors don't want to take the time to go through this process. Also, voice recognition software will not be able to discern "sound alike" words (like "there", "they're" and "their") or correct errors in dictation (saying left foot when really meaning right foot, grammatical errors, etc.). So, even when a doctor does use voice recognition software, some "cleaning up" and editing of the transcribed document is still needed. The doctor is usually too busy to do it, so an "editor" (someone like a medical transcriptionist) would be a likely candidate for the job.
Another factor to consider is the quality of dictation some doctors give—some of them have been known to talk too fast, mumble, eat lunch, drive, or urinate (yes, you read that right), all while dictating reports. They use appalling grammar and fragmented sentences in their dictation, knowing that the transcriptionist will edit everything and make it "sound right" in the finished document. These doctors are "too busy" to sit down in front of a computer to carefully dictate. But even if they did take the time to dictate into a computer, the end result would still require a lot of correcting. (And what "busy" doctor wants to spend time typing in front of a computer when they can be seeing patients?)
From what I've been led to believe, it'll be a while (if ever) before voice recognition is commonplace in the health field. And even if it does eventually become mainstream, the need for "editors" will still exist. However, it is often speculated that voice recognition software will be used more and more by the transcriptionists themselves—they can "re-dictate" a doctor's report into the voice recognition software and save their tired wrists and fingers from typing.
The conclusion I am coming to at this time is that the technology of voice recognition very likely could have a place in the future of medical transcription, in some way or another. But, it wouldn't necessarily mean that there wouldn't be a need for medical transcriptionists—only that perhaps the MT's duties would eventually change or evolve.
Concerns about outsourcing to India:
Ah yes, the other issue: Outsourcing to India. It is well-known that there is a definite shortage of qualified medical transcriptionists in the USA. Therefore, some healthcare facilities and doctors are now getting their transcription done offshore, in places like India. (Dictation files are transferred via a secure connection on the Internet.) These offshore services are often dramatically cheaper, since Indian transcriptionists are paid a fraction of what US transcriptionists are paid.
However, there are questions about the quality of the transcription from India, since these transcriptionists are not native English-speakers. They will not always pick up subtleties of speech that a native English-speaker may be able to discern when listening to the dictations. This will definitely lower the accuracy of medical documents transcribed by a non-English speaking MT in many cases.
There are other concerns as well with offshore transcription—about confidentiality, accountability, etc. A new US law regarding patient confidentiality (HIPAA) is really shaking things up in all medical fields. Some are speculating that the outsourcing of medical records may eventually be deemed to not be HIPAA-compliant.
While it's hard to predict the future of MT in regards to offshore outsourcing, I don't think there's any reason for the American-based MT to assume that the "sky is falling" and that India is destined to take over all medical transcription in the USA. Some transcription services and healthcare facilities are definitely not comfortable having their transcription done overseas. While others will only to think of cutting costs (and offshore transcription is usually cheaper), many doctors and healthcare facilities would prefer to have their transcription work done locally. I often see help wanted ads for MT positions that very emphatically state, "NO OFFSHORE." There are many employers of MTs that definitely prefer to hire domestic transcriptionists.
The impression I'm getting at this time is that US-based transcriptionists—if competent and well-trained—should be able to find work. A domestic (US-based or Canada-based) MT whose first language is English usually has some definite advantages when it comes to medical transcription.
http://www.delicateflower.org/MT/index.html
