Diagnostic Errors in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review
What is your stroke hospital misdiagnosis rate on strokes?
Have they prevented these problems from happening?
The latest here:
- Overall diagnostic accuracy in the emergency department
(ED) is high, but some patients receive an incorrect diagnosis (~5.7%).
Some of these patients suffer an adverse event because of the incorrect
diagnosis (~2.0%), and some of these adverse events are serious (~0.3%).
This translates to about 1 in 18 ED patients receiving an incorrect
diagnosis, 1 in 50 suffering an adverse event, and 1 in 350 suffering
permanent disability or death. These rates are comparable to those seen
in primary care and hospital inpatient care.
- We estimate that among 130 million emergency department (ED) visits
per year in the United States that 7.4 million (5.7%) patients are
misdiagnosed, 2.6 million (2.0%) suffer an adverse event as a result,
and about 370,000 (0.3%) suffer serious harms from diagnostic error. Put
in terms of an average ED with 25,000 visits annually and average
diagnostic performance, each year this would be over 1,400 diagnostic
errors, 500 diagnostic adverse events, and 75 serious harms, including
50 deaths per ED. Although overall error and harm rates are derived from
three smaller studies conducted outside the United States (in Canada,
Spain, and Switzerland, with combined n=1,758), study methods were
prospective and rigorous. All three were conducted at university
hospitals, and, for the two studies used to estimate harms, about 92
percent of clinicians under study at those institutions had full
training or formal certification in emergency medicine.
- Five conditions (#1 stroke, #2 myocardial infarction, #3 aortic
aneurysm/dissection, #4 spinal cord compression/injury, #5 venous
thromboembolism) account for 39 percent of serious misdiagnosis-related
harms, and the top 15 conditions account for 68 percent. Variation in
diagnostic error rates by disease are striking (range 1.5% for
myocardial infarction to 56% for spinal abscess, with the other thirteen
falling between 10% and 36%). Stroke, the top serious harm-producing
disease, is missed an estimated 17% of the time. Among these 15
diseases, myocardial infarction is the only one with false negative
rates near zero (1.5%), well below the estimated average rate across all
diseases (5.7%).
- For a given disease, nonspecific or atypical symptoms increase the
likelihood of error. For stroke, dizziness or vertigo increases the odds
of misdiagnosis 14-fold over motor symptoms (those with dizziness and
vertigo are missed initially 40% of the time).
- Variation in diagnostic error rates across demographic groups is
present and sometimes fairly large in magnitude. The effect of age is
heterogeneous and disease-specific (e.g., younger age increases risk of
missed stroke 6.7-fold, while older age increases risk of missed
appendicitis). Female sex and non-White race were often associated with
important (20–30%) increases in misdiagnosis risk; although these
disparities were inconsistently demonstrated across studies, being a
woman or a racial or ethnic minority was generally not found to be
"protective" against misdiagnosis (i.e., was neutral at best).
- Variation in diagnostic error rates across specific hospital EDs is
wide. Methods of measuring diagnostic errors in the ED are highly
variable. However, even when similar methods are used, measured
diagnostic error rates vary up to 100-fold across hospitals. In
individual studies, missed cases varied by hospital for subarachnoid
hemorrhage (0% to 100%), myocardial infarction (0% to 29%), and
appendicitis (1% to 16%). Error rates are usually found to be lower in
academic/teaching hospitals, but it is unknown if this is an effect of
increased availability/intensive use of diagnostic technologies or other
factors.
- Root causes of ED diagnostic errors were mostly cognitive errors
linked to the process of bedside diagnosis. Malpractice claims
associated with serious misdiagnosis-related harms involved failures of
clinical assessment, reasoning, or decision making in about 90 percent
of cases. Similar findings were seen in incident report data. These
issues are not unique to the ED—they are seen across clinical settings,
regardless of study method.
- The strongest, most consistent predictors of ED diagnostic error
were individual case factors that increased the cognitive challenge of
identifying the underlying disorder, with nonspecific, mild, transient,
or "atypical" symptoms being the most frequent.
- Our findings are tempered by limitations in the underlying evidence
base, including issues related to data sources, measurement methods,
and causal relationships. Nevertheless, overall diagnostic error and
misdiagnosis-related harm rates are consistent with what has been found
in other clinical settings (e.g., primary care and inpatient).
No comments:
Post a Comment