scholarly journals Negligence during subject examination as the premise of responsibility for diagnostic error

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 271
Author(s):  
Monika Sadowska
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Error ◽  
Subject Examination

Observer Variation in Clinical Diagnosis - A Computer-Aided Assessment of its Magnitude and Importance in 552 Patients with Abdominal Pain

1973 ◽  
Vol 12 (02) ◽  
pp. 108-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. W. Gill ◽  
D. J. Leaper ◽  
P. J. Guillou ◽  
J. R. Staniland ◽  
J. C. Horhocks ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Abdominal Pain ◽  
Clinical Diagnosis ◽  
Error Rate ◽  
Diagnostic System ◽  
Diagnostic Error ◽  
Observer Variation ◽  
History Taking ◽  
Computer Aided ◽  
Computer Based ◽  
Initial Survey

This report describes an evaluation of »observer variation« in history taking and examination of patients with abdominal pain. After an initial survey in which the degree of observer variation amongst the present authors fully confirmed previous rather gloomy forecasts, a system of »agreed definitions« was produced, and further studies showed a rapid and considerable fall in the degree of observer variation between the data recorded by the same authors. Finally, experience with a computer-based diagnostic system using the same system of agreed definitions showed the maximum diagnostic error rate due to faulty acquisition of data to be low (4.7°/o in a series of 552 cases). It is suggested as a result of these studies that — at least in respect of abdominal pain — errors in data acquisition by the clinician need not be the prime cause of faulty diagnoses.

Handshake antimicrobial stewardship as a model to recognize and prevent diagnostic errors

Diagnosis ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Justin B. Searns ◽  
Manon C. Williams ◽  
Christine E. MacBrayne ◽  
Ann L. Wirtz ◽  
Jan E. Leonard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Antimicrobial Stewardship ◽  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Diagnostic Errors ◽  
Diagnostic Error ◽  
Primary Treatment ◽  
Treatment Team ◽  
Children's Hospital ◽  
Children’S Hospital ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Made In

AbstractObjectivesFew studies describe the impact of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) on recognizing and preventing diagnostic errors. Handshake stewardship (HS-ASP) is a novel ASP model that prospectively reviews hospital-wide antimicrobial usage with recommendations made in person to treatment teams. The purpose of this study was to determine if HS-ASP could identify and intervene on potential diagnostic errors for children hospitalized at a quaternary care children’s hospital.MethodsPreviously self-identified “Great Catch” (GC) interventions by the Children’s Hospital Colorado HS-ASP team from 10/2014 through 5/2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Each GC was categorized based on the types of recommendations from HS-ASP, including if any diagnostic recommendations were made to the treatment team. Each GC was independently scored using the “Safer Dx Instrument” to determine presence of diagnostic error based on a previously determined cut-off score of ≤1.50. Interrater reliability for the instrument was measured using a randomized subset of one third of GCs.ResultsDuring the study period, there were 162 GC interventions. Of these, 65 (40%) included diagnostic recommendations by HS-ASP and 19 (12%) had a Safer Dx Score of ≤1.50, (Κ=0.44; moderate agreement). Of those GCs associated with diagnostic errors, the HS-ASP team made a diagnostic recommendation to the primary treatment team 95% of the time.ConclusionsHandshake stewardship has the potential to identify and intervene on diagnostic errors for hospitalized children.

scholarly journals The effect of prior experience on diagnostic reasoning: exploration of availability bias

Diagnosis ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 265-272
Author(s):  
Sandra Monteiro ◽  
Jonathan Sherbino ◽  
Jonathan S. Ilgen ◽  
Emily M. Hayden ◽  
Elizabeth Howey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Students ◽  
Clinical Features ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Diagnostic Error ◽  
Diagnostic Reasoning ◽  
Error Rates ◽  
Prior Exposure ◽  
Clinical Vignettes ◽  
Experience Levels ◽  
Similar Patient

AbstractObjectivesDiagnostic reasoning has been shown to be influenced by a prior similar patient case. However, it is unclear whether this process influences diagnostic error rates or whether clinicians at all experience levels are equally susceptible. The present study measured the influence of specific prior exposure and experience level on diagnostic accuracy.MethodsTo create the experience of prior exposure, participants (pre-clerkship medical students, emergency medicine residents, and faculty) first verified diagnoses of clinical vignettes. The influence of prior exposures was measured using equiprobable clinical vignettes; indicating two diagnoses. Participants diagnosed equiprobable cases that were: 1) matched to exposure cases (in one of three conditions: a) similar patient features, similar clinical features; b) dissimilar patient features, similar clinical features; c) similar patient features, dissimilar clinical features), or 2) not matched to any prior case (d) no exposure). A diagnosis consistent with a matched exposure case was scored correct. Cases with no prior exposure had no matched cases, hence validated the equiprobable design.ResultsDiagnosis A represented 47% of responses in condition d, but there was no influence of specific similarity of patient characteristics for Diagnosis A, F(3,712)=7.28, p=0.28 or Diagnosis B, F(3,712)=4.87, p=0.19. When re-scored based on matching both equiprobable diagnoses, accuracy was high, but favored faculty (n=40) 98%, and residents (n=39) 98% over medical students (n=32) 85%, F(2,712)=35.6, p<0.0001. Accuracy for medical students was 84, 87, 94, and 73% for conditions a–d, respectively, interaction F(2,712)=3.55, p<0.002.ConclusionsThe differential diagnosis of pre-clerkship medical students improved with prior exposure, but this was unrelated to specific case or patient features. The accuracy of medical residents and staff was not influenced by prior exposure.

scholarly journals Use of patient complaints to identify diagnosis-related safety concerns: a mixed-method evaluation

2021 ◽  
pp. bmjqs-2020-011593
Author(s):  
Traber D Giardina ◽  
Saritha Korukonda ◽  
Umber Shahid ◽  
Viralkumar Vaghani ◽  
Divvy K Upadhyay ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Record ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Diagnostic Testing ◽  
Diagnostic Errors ◽  
Diagnostic Error ◽  
Diagnostic Process ◽  
Healthcare Organisation ◽  
Safety Concerns ◽  
Patient Complaints ◽  
Malpractice Claims

BackgroundPatient complaints are associated with adverse events and malpractice claims but underused in patient safety improvement.ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the use of patient complaint data to identify safety concerns related to diagnosis as an initial step to using this information to facilitate learning and improvement.MethodsWe reviewed patient complaints submitted to Geisinger, a large healthcare organisation in the USA, from August to December 2017 (cohort 1) and January to June 2018 (cohort 2). We selected complaints more likely to be associated with diagnostic concerns in Geisinger’s existing complaint taxonomy. Investigators reviewed all complaint summaries and identified cases as ‘concerning’ for diagnostic error using the National Academy of Medicine’s definition of diagnostic error. For all ‘concerning’ cases, a clinician-reviewer evaluated the associated investigation report and the patient’s medical record to identify any missed opportunities in making a correct or timely diagnosis. In cohort 2, we selected a 10% sample of ‘concerning’ cases to test this smaller pragmatic sample as a proof of concept for future organisational monitoring.ResultsIn cohort 1, we reviewed 1865 complaint summaries and identified 177 (9.5%) concerning reports. Review and analysis identified 39 diagnostic errors. Most were categorised as ‘Clinical Care issues’ (27, 69.2%), defined as concerns/questions related to the care that is provided by clinicians in any setting. In cohort 2, we reviewed 2423 patient complaint summaries and identified 310 (12.8%) concerning reports. The 10% sample (n=31 cases) contained five diagnostic errors. Qualitative analysis of cohort 1 cases identified concerns about return visits for persistent and/or worsening symptoms, interpersonal issues and diagnostic testing.ConclusionsAnalysis of patient complaint data and corresponding medical record review identifies patterns of failures in the diagnostic process reported by patients and families. Health systems could systematically analyse available data on patient complaints to monitor diagnostic safety concerns and identify opportunities for learning and improvement.

Situativity: a family of social cognitive theories for understanding clinical reasoning and diagnostic error

Diagnosis ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 169-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerusalem Merkebu ◽  
Michael Battistone ◽  
Kevin McMains ◽  
Kathrine McOwen ◽  
Catherine Witkop ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Reasoning ◽  
Distributed Cognition ◽  
Social Cognitive ◽  
Diagnostic Error ◽  
Dynamic Interactions ◽  
Clinical Encounters ◽  
Cognitive Theories ◽  
Context Specific ◽  
Social Cognitive Theories ◽  
Physician Patient

AbstractThe diagnostic error crisis suggests a shift in how we view clinical reasoning and may be vital for transforming how we view clinical encounters. Building upon the literature, we propose clinical reasoning and error are context-specific and proceed to advance a family of theories that represent a model outlining the complex interplay of physician, patient, and environmental factors driving clinical reasoning and error. These contemporary social cognitive theories (i.e. embedded cognition, ecological psychology, situated cognition, and distributed cognition) can emphasize the dynamic interactions occurring amongst participants in particular settings. The situational determinants that contribute to diagnostic error are also explored.

Disc space-targeted angled axial MR images of the lumbar spine: a potential source of diagnostic error

2007 ◽  
Vol 36 (12) ◽  
pp. 1147-1153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kush Singh ◽  
Clyde A. Helms ◽  
David Fiorella ◽  
Nancy A. Major
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Diagnostic Error ◽  
Mr Images ◽  
Disc Space ◽  
Potential Source

Latent Model for Correlated Binary Data with Diagnostic Error

Biometrics ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 1232-1235 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna H. Shih ◽  
Paul S. Albert
Keyword(s):  
Binary Data ◽  
Diagnostic Error ◽  
Correlated Binary Data

scholarly journals Are we equal in death?: Avoiding diagnostic error in brain death

Neurology ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 70 (4) ◽  
pp. e14-e15 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Laureys ◽  
J. J. Fins
Keyword(s):  
Brain Death ◽  
Diagnostic Error
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document