JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Clinical documentation in specialized, interdisciplinary rehabilitation is often time-consuming and complex, as the underlying issues are persistent and multifaceted. The documentation process may contribute to clinician burnout, job dissatisfaction, and reduced time for patient interaction. Digital scribes based on artificial intelligence (AI) transcribe and summarize clinical notes. These scribes may help reduce documentation burden; however, their usefulness and usability in specialized rehabilitation services remain uninvestigated.

Objective:

This study assessed the use of an ambient AI-scribing tool among physicians and psychologists in specialized rehabilitation, focusing on perceived usefulness, usability, note quality, impact on patient interaction, perceptions of time spent on documentation, and documentation-related fatigue.

Methods:

Over approximately four weeks, physicians and psychologists at nine specialized rehabilitation centers used an ambient AI-scribe tool during clinical consultations. Usability and user experience were assessed using the System Usability Scale (SUS) and a modified Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Participants rated an AI-generated note using a modified PDQI-9 questionnaire to evaluate documentation quality. Additional questions explored perceived impact on patient interaction, documentation-related fatigue, and general attitudes toward AI technology (AIAS).

Results:

Thirty-one clinicians (18 physicians, 13 psychologists) used the AI-scribe over approximately one month and completed evaluation questionnaires. The mean SUS score was 78.3 (SD = 10.4), with 84.4% scoring above the usability threshold. Perceived usefulness (PU) and ease of use (PEOU) were relatively high (mean PU = 5.65; PEOU = 5.56), and 87% expressed intention to use the AI-scribe in future practice. Most participants (79%) agreed that using the AI-scribe reduced time spent on documentation, while 66% reported a reduced perception of documentation-related fatigue. The quality of AI-generated notes was rated relatively high, with a mean modified PDQI-9 score of 4.3 (SD = 0.3) out of 5. Comprehensibility received the highest rating (M = 4.6, SD = 0.6), while thoroughness scored lowest (M = 3.9, SD = 1.0) among the note quality variables. Approximately 69% and 66% of participants expressed some level of agreement that the AI-scribe enhanced attentiveness and reduced distractions during patient consultations. A few participants reported that some notes were incomplete, lacked biopsychosocial details, and contained inaccuracies

Conclusions:

This study demonstrated broad acceptance of an AI-based ambient scribe among physicians and psychologists working in specialized rehabilitation. The AI-scribe was generally perceived as valuable, easy to use, and clinically relevant, with high usability scores, strong future use intent, and positive ratings of documentation quality. Most participants reported reduced perceived documentation burden and improved attentiveness during consultations, suggesting a potential for more focused, patient-centered interactions. Some concerns were noted regarding completeness and occasional inaccuracies, highlighting areas for refinement. Future research should explore long-term implementation in routine rehabilitation settings, including effects on workflow, documentation time, note accuracy, and patient experience across diverse clinical roles.