Diagnostic errors in the pediatric and neonatal ICU: a systematic review

Neonatal autopsy-is it relevant in today's era?

Autopsy of infants can provide vital information about the cause of death and contributes to the detection of diagnostic errors, especially in a low- or middle-income country. To observe the clinicopathological agreement in neonatal deaths in neonatal intensive care units (NICU) and comment on the additional information retrieved by autopsy. A retrospective observational study was conducted in the NICU from January 2020 to December 2022. Neonatal deaths were analyzed, and clinical details and autopsy findings were collected. Both clinical and pathological diagnoses were classified according to the Goldman classification. Twenty-two newborn infants were enrolled. The mean gestational age was 33.5 (±4.38) weeks, and the median birth weight was 1510 (1005-2100) g. There was complete concordance between clinical and pathological diagnosis in 11 (50%) cases. Major diagnostic errors occurred in 41% of cases. Respiratory system disorders (lung infections, airway anomalies) accounted for six (54%) cases of missed diagnosis. Our study showed that the diagnosis was revised after autopsy in about one-third of cases, and newer findings were identified in one-fifth of cases.

Prevalence and Characteristics of Diagnostic Error in Pediatric Critical Care: A Multicenter Study

OBJECTIVES

Effective interventions to prevent diagnostic error among critically ill children should be informed by diagnostic error prevalence and etiologies. We aimed to determine the prevalence and characteristics of diagnostic errors and identify factors associated with error in patients admitted to the PICU.

DESIGN

Multicenter retrospective cohort study using structured medical record review by trained clinicians using the Revised Safer Dx instrument to identify diagnostic error (defined as missed opportunities in diagnosis). Cases with potential errors were further reviewed by four pediatric intensivists who made final consensus determinations of diagnostic error occurrence. Demographic, clinical, clinician, and encounter data were also collected.

SETTING

Four academic tertiary-referral PICUs.

PATIENTS

Eight hundred eighty-two randomly selected patients 0-18 years old who were nonelectively admitted to participating PICUs.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Of 882 patient admissions, 13 (1.5%) had a diagnostic error up to 7 days after PICU admission. Infections (46%) and respiratory conditions (23%) were the most common missed diagnoses. One diagnostic error caused harm with a prolonged hospital stay. Common missed diagnostic opportunities included failure to consider the diagnosis despite a suggestive history (69%) and failure to broaden diagnostic testing (69%). Unadjusted analysis identified more diagnostic errors in patients with atypical presentations (23.1% vs 3.6%, p = 0.011), neurologic chief complaints (46.2% vs 18.8%, p = 0.024), admitting intensivists greater than or equal to 45 years old (92.3% vs 65.1%, p = 0.042), admitting intensivists with more service weeks/year (mean 12.8 vs 10.9 wk, p = 0.031), and diagnostic uncertainty on admission (77% vs 25.1%, p < 0.001). Generalized linear mixed models determined that atypical presentation (odds ratio [OR] 4.58; 95% CI, 0.94-17.1) and diagnostic uncertainty on admission (OR 9.67; 95% CI, 2.86-44.0) were significantly associated with diagnostic error.

CONCLUSIONS

Among critically ill children, 1.5% had a diagnostic error up to 7 days after PICU admission. Diagnostic errors were associated with atypical presentations and diagnostic uncertainty on admission, suggesting possible targets for intervention.

An audit of autopsy-confirmed diagnostic errors in perinatal deaths: What are the most common major missed diagnoses

Perinatal autopsies are essential to establish the cause of stillbirth or neonatal death and improve clinical practice. Limited studies have provided detailed major missed diagnoses of perinatal deaths in current clinical practice. In this retrospective audit of 177 perinatal autopsies including 99 stillbirths and 78 neonatal deaths with complete pathologic evaluation, 66 cases (21 Class I and 45 Class II diagnostic errors) were revealed as major discrepancies (37.3%), with complete agreements in 80 cases (45.2%). The difference in major discrepancies between stillbirth and neonatal death groups was significant (P < 0.001), with neonatal deaths being more prone to Class I errors. Various respiratory diseases (25/66, 37.9%) and congenital malformations (16/66, 24.2%) accounted for the majority of missed diagnoses (41/66, 62.1%). More importantly, neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (NRDS) was the most common type I missed diagnosis (7/8, 87.5%), markedly higher than the average 11.9% of all Class I errors. Our findings suggest that there are high disparities between clinical diagnoses and autopsy findings in perinatal deaths, and that various respiratory diseases are mostly inclined to cause major diagnostic errors. We first demonstrated that NRDS is the most common type I missed diagnosis in perinatal deaths, which clinicians should pay special attention to in practice.

Opportunities for Diagnostic Improvement Among Pediatric Hospital Readmissions

OBJECTIVES

Diagnostic errors, termed "missed opportunities for improving diagnosis" (MOIDs), are known sources of harm in children but have not been well characterized in pediatric hospital medicine. Our objectives were to systematically identify and describe MOIDs among general pediatric patients who experienced hospital readmission, outline improvement opportunities, and explore factors associated with increased risk of MOID.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Our retrospective cohort study included unplanned readmissions within 15 days of discharge from a freestanding children's hospital (October 2018-September 2020). Health records from index admissions and readmissions were independently reviewed and discussed by practicing inpatient physicians to identify MOIDs using an established instrument, SaferDx. MOIDs were evaluated using a diagnostic-specific tool to identify improvement opportunities within the diagnostic process.

RESULTS

MOIDs were identified in 22 (6.3%) of 348 readmissions. Opportunities for improvement included: delay in considering the correct diagnosis (n = 11, 50%) and failure to order needed test(s) (n = 10, 45%). Patients with MOIDs were older (median age: 3.8 [interquartile range 1.5-11.2] vs 1.0 [0.3-4.9] years) than patients without MOIDs but similar in sex, primary language, race, ethnicity, and insurance type. We did not identify conditions associated with higher risk of MOID. Lower respiratory tract infections accounted for 26% of admission diagnoses but only 1 (4.5%) case of MOID.

CONCLUSIONS

Standardized review of pediatric readmissions identified MOIDs and opportunities for improvement within the diagnostic process, particularly in clinician decision-making. We identified conditions with low incidence of MOID. Further work is needed to better understand pediatric populations at highest risk for MOID.

Major discrepancy between clinical diagnosis of death and anatomopathological findings in adolescents with chronic diseases during 18-years

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the inconsistency between clinical diagnosis of death and autopsy findings in adolescents with chronic diseases.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study including a sample of adolescents' autopsies who died in a pediatric and adolescent tertiary hospital over 18 consecutive years. During this period, there were n = 2912 deaths, and n = 581/2912(20%) occurred in adolescents. Of these, n = 85/581(15%) underwent autopsies and were analyzed. Further results were divided into two groups: Goldman classes I or II (high disagreement between main clinical diagnosis of death and anatomopathological findings, n = 26) and Goldman classes III, IV or V (low or no disagreement between these two parameters, n = 59).

RESULTS

Median age at death (13.5 [10‒19] vs. 13 [10‒19] years, p = 0.495) and disease duration (22 [0‒164] vs. 20 [0‒200] months, p = 0.931), and frequencies for males (58% vs. 44%, p = 0.247) were similar between class I/II vs. class III/IV/V. The frequency of pneumonia (73% vs. 48%, p = 0.029), pulmonary abscess (12% vs. 0%, p = 0.026), as well as isolation of yeast (27% vs. 5%, p = 0.008), and virus (15% vs. 2%, p = 0.029) identified in the autopsy, were significantly higher in adolescents with Goldman class I/II compared to those with Goldman class III/IV/V. In contrast, cerebral edema was significantly lower in adolescents of the first group (4% vs. 25%, p = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

This study showed that 30% of the adolescents with chronic diseases had major discrepancies between clinical diagnosis of death and autopsy findings. Pneumonia, pulmonary abscess, as well as isolation of yeast and virus were more frequently identified at autopsy findings in the groups with major discrepancies.

Frequency of diagnostic errors in the neonatal intensive care unit: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the frequency and etiology of diagnostic errors during the first 7 days of admission for inborn neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) patients.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 600 consecutive inborn admissions. A physician used the "Safer Dx NICU Instrument" to review the electronic health record for the first 7 days of admission, and categorized cases as "yes," "unclear," or "no" for diagnostic error. A secondary reviewer evaluated all "yes" charts plus a random sample of charts in the other categories. Subsequently, all secondary reviewers reviewed records with discordance between primary and secondary review to arrive at consensus.

RESULTS

We identified 37 diagnostic errors (6.2% of study patients) with "substantial agreement" between reviewers (κ = 0.66). The most common diagnostic process breakdown was missed maternal history (51%).

CONCLUSION

The frequency of diagnostic error in inborn NICU patients during the first 7 days of admission is 6.2%.

Diagnostic Error in Pediatrics: A Narrative Review

A priority topic for patient safety research is diagnostic errors. However, despite the significant growth in awareness of their unacceptably high incidence and associated harm, a relative paucity of large, high-quality studies of diagnostic error in pediatrics exists. In this narrative review, we present what is known about the incidence and epidemiology of diagnostic error in pediatrics as well as the established research methods for identifying, evaluating, and reducing diagnostic errors, including their strengths and weaknesses. Additionally, we highlight that pediatric diagnostic error remains an area in need of both innovative research and quality improvement efforts to apply learnings from a rapidly growing evidence base. We propose several key research questions aimed at addressing persistent gaps in the pediatric diagnostic error literature that focus on the foundational knowledge needed to inform effective interventions to reduce the incidence of diagnostic errors and their associated harm. Additional research is needed to better establish the epidemiology of diagnostic error in pediatrics, including identifying high-risk clinical scenarios, patient populations, and groups of diagnoses. A critical need exists for validated measures of both diagnostic errors and diagnostic processes that can be adapted for different clinical settings and standardized for use across varying institutions. Pediatric researchers will need to work collaboratively on large-scale, high-quality studies to accomplish the ultimate goal of reducing diagnostic errors and their associated harm in children by addressing these fundamental gaps in knowledge.

A Research Agenda for Diagnostic Excellence in Critical Care Medicine

Diagnosing critically ill patients in the intensive care unit is difficult. As a result, diagnostic errors in the intensive care unit are common and have been shown to cause harm. Research to improve diagnosis in critical care medicine has accelerated in past years. However, much work remains to fully elucidate the diagnostic process in critical care. To achieve diagnostic excellence, interdisciplinary research is needed, adopting a balanced strategy of continued biomedical discovery while addressing the complex care delivery systems underpinning the diagnosis of critical illness.

Inter-center variation in autopsy practices among regional neonatal intensive care units (NICUs)

OBJECTIVE

To characterize infants who underwent autopsy in regional neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) and examine inter-center variability in autopsy completion.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study of infants who died between 2010 and 2016 from 32 participating hospitals in the Children's Hospital Neonatal Database (CHND). Maternal/infant demographics and hospital stay data were collected, along with autopsy rates by center, year, and region. Data analysis utilized bivariate and multivariable statistics.

RESULT

Of 6299 deaths, 1742 (27.7%) completed autopsy. Infants who underwent autopsy had higher median birth weight (2 124 g vs. 1 655 g) and gestational age (34 vs. 32 weeks). No differences were seen in sex, length of stay, or primary cause of death. Marked inter-center variability was observed, with 17-fold adjusted difference (p < 0.001) in autopsy rates.

CONCLUSION

Patient characteristics do not account for variability in autopsy practices across regional NICUs. Factors such as provider practices and parental preferences should be investigated.

Diagnostic error in the pediatric hospital: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Diagnostic error is a prevalent type of medical error that is associated with considerable patient harm and increased medical costs. The majority of literature guiding the current understanding of diagnostic error in the hospital setting is from adult studies. However, there is research to suggest this type of error is also prevalent in the pediatric specialty.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this study was to define the current understanding of diagnostic error in the pediatric hospital through a structured literature review.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and identified studies focusing on three aspects of diagnostic error in pediatric hospitals: the incidence or prevalence, contributing factors, and related interventions. We used a tiered review, and a standardized electronic form to extract data from included articles.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine abstracts were screened and 23 full-text studies were included in the final review. Seventeen of the 23 studies focused on the incidence or prevalence, with only 3 studies investigating the utility of interventions. Most studies took place in an intensive care unit or emergency department with very few studies including only patients on the general wards. Overall, the prevalence of diagnostic error in pediatric hospitals varied greatly and depended on the measurement technique and specific hospital setting. Both healthcare system factors and individual cognitive factors were found to contribute to diagnostic error, with there being limited evidence to guide how best to mitigate the influence of these factors on the diagnostic process.

CONCLUSION

The general knowledge of diagnostic error in pediatric hospital settings is limited. Future work should incorporate structured frameworks to measure diagnostic errors and examine clinicians' diagnostic processes in real-time to help guide effective hospital-wide interventions.

Diagnostic Error in the Critically Ill: A Hidden Epidemic?

Epidemiologic studies of diagnostic error in the intensive care unit (ICU) consist mostly of descriptive autopsy series. In these studies, rates of diagnostic errors are approximately 5% to 10%. Recently validated methods for retrospectively measuring error have expanded our understanding of the scope of the problem. These alternative measurement strategies have yielded similar estimates for the frequency of diagnostic error in the ICU. Although there is a fair understanding of the frequency of errors, further research is needed to better define the risk factors for diagnostic error in the ICU.

Diagnostic Errors in Pediatric Critical Care: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the literature on prevalence, impact, and contributing factors related to diagnostic error in the PICU.

DATA SOURCES

Search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library up to December 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies on diagnostic error and the diagnostic process in pediatric critical care were included. Non-English studies with no translation, case reports/series, studies providing no information on diagnostic error, studies focused on non-PICU populations, and studies focused on a single condition/disease or a single diagnostic test/tool were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data on research design, objectives, study sample, and results pertaining to the prevalence, impact, and factors associated with diagnostic error were abstracted from each study.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Using independent tiered review, 396 abstracts were screened, and 17 studies (14 full-text, 3 abstracts) were ultimately included. Fifteen of 17 studies (88%) had an observational research design. Autopsy studies (autopsy rates were 20-47%) showed a 10-23% rate of missed major diagnoses; 5-16% of autopsy-discovered diagnostic errors had a potential adverse impact on survival and would have changed management. Retrospective record reviews reported varying rates of diagnostic error from 8% in a general PICU population to 12% among unexpected critical admissions and 21-25% of patients discussed at PICU morbidity and mortality conferences. Cardiovascular, infectious, congenital, and neurologic conditions were most commonly misdiagnosed. Systems factors (40-67%), cognitive factors (20-3%), and both systems and cognitive factors (40%) were associated with diagnostic error. Limited information was available on the impact of misdiagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge of diagnostic errors in the PICU is limited. Future work to understand diagnostic errors should involve a balanced focus between studying the diagnosis of individual diseases and uncovering common system- and process-related determinants of diagnostic error.

Referral communication for pediatric intensive care unit admission and the diagnosis of critically ill children: A pilot ethnography

PURPOSE

The effect of communication between referring and accepting clinicians during patient transitions to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) on diagnostic quality is largely unknown. This pilot study aims to determine the feasibility of using focused ethnography to understand the relationship between referral communication and the diagnostic process for critically ill children.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted focused ethnography in an academic tertiary referral PICU by directly observing the referral and admission of 3 non-electively admitted children 0-17 years old. We also conducted 21 semi-structured interviews of their parents and admitting PICU staff (intensivists, fellows/residents, medical students, nurses, and respiratory therapists) and reviewed their medical records post-discharge.

RESULTS

Performing focused ethnography in a busy PICU is feasible. We identified three areas for additional exploration: (1) how information transfer affects the PICU diagnostic process; (2) how uncertainty in patient assessment affects the decision to transfer to the PICU; and (3) how the PICU team's expectations are influenced by referral communication.

CONCLUSIONS

Focused ethnography in the PICU is feasible to investigate relationships between clinician referral communication and the diagnostic process for critically ill children.

AGREEMENT BETWEEN CLINICAL AND ANATOMOPATHOLOGICAL DIAGNOSES IN PEDIATRIC INTENSIVE CARE

Objective:

Although autopsy is deemed the gold standard for diagnosis, its performance has been decreasing while adverse events have been increasing, of which 17% consist in diagnostic errors. The purpose of this study was to estimate the prevalence of diagnostic errors based on anatomopathological diagnosis in a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU).

Methods:

This is a cross-sectional, retrospective study on 31 patients who died between 2004 and 2014. Diagnoses were compared in order to assess whether there was agreement between clinical major diagnosis (CMD) and the cause of death as described in the autopsy record (CDAR), which were classified according to the Goldman Criteria.

Results:

Of 3,117 patients, 263 died (8.4%). Autopsy was conducted in 38 cases (14.4%), and 31 were included in the study. There was a 67% decrease in the number of autopsies over the last 10 years. Absolute agreement between the diagnoses (class V) was observed in 18 cases (58.0%), and disagreement (class I), in 11 (35.4%). There was greater difficulty in diagnosing acute diseases and diseases of rapid fatal evolution such as myocarditis. Seven patients were admitted in critical health conditions and died within the first 24 hours of hospitalization.

Conclusions:

Autopsy not only enables to identify diagnostic errors, but also provides the opportunity to learn from mistakes. The results emphasize the relevance of the autopsy examination for diagnostic elucidation and the creation of an information database concerning the main diagnoses of patients who rapidly progress to death in PICU, increasing the index of clinical suspicion of the team working at this unit.

Autopsy and pre-mortem diagnostic discrepancy review in an Irish tertiary PICU

Our study had two objectives: (1) to review ante- and post-mortem diagnoses and assign a Goldman error classification and (2) establish autopsy rates within our centre. We performed a retrospective analysis of autopsies performed on patients who died in our paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) between November 13, 2012, and October 31, 2018. Medical and autopsy data of all patients was reviewed, and Goldman classification of discrepancy between ante- and post-mortem diagnoses was assigned. Our centre is a tertiary PICU, and we included all patients that died in PICU within the designated timeframe. Our results were as follows: 396 deaths occurred in PICU from 8329 (4.75%) admissions. Ninety-nine (25%) had an autopsy, 75 required by the coroner. All were included in the study. Fifty-three were male and 46 females. Fifty-three patients were transferred from external hospitals, 46 from our centre. Forty-one were neonates, 32 were < 1 year of age, and 26 were > 1 year of age. The median length of stay was 3 days. Eighteen were post-cardiac surgery, and three post-cardiac catheter procedure. Major diagnostic errors (class I/II) were identified in 14 (14.1%), 2 (2%) class I, and 12 (12.1%) were class II errors. Class III and IV errors occurred in 28 (28.2%) patients. Complete concordance (class V) occurred in 57 (57.5%) cases.Conclusion: We conclude that the autopsy rate and the diagnostic discrepancy rate within our PICU are comparable to those previously reported. Our findings show the continuing value of autopsy in determining the cause of death and providing greater diagnostic clarity. Given their value, post-mortem examinations, where indicated, should be considered part of a physician's duty of care to families and future patients. What is Known: • Major diagnostic discrepancies (class I/II) in PICU have been reported at 20.2%. ⁽¹⁰⁾ • PICU autopsy rates have varied from 36 to 67% since 1994 with most recently reported rates in 2018 being 36%. ^(6-9) What is New: • We report an Irish PICU major diagnostic discrepancy (class I/II) rates of 14.1% contributing further to reported discrepancy rates in PICU literature to date. • This study contributes the Irish PICU post-mortem rate in a tertiary centre which was 25% over an almost 6-year period.

Ethics in clinical autopsy

This manuscript concerns the ethical aspects of the clinical autopsy procedure. Much of the literature on this topic addresses some of the multifaceted issues potentially involved: religious beliefs and/or cultural traditions coming to bear on the management of autopsies, relations between families and healthcare personnel (physicians and technicians) involved in conducting an autopsy, ethical implications of regulations to follow and procedures for obtaining biological samples for further diagnostics or research. All these issues have ethical implications, particularly in today's globalised cultural domain. To preserve for future generations the teaching and scientific value of the clinical autopsy, scientific societies and academic institutions should endorse educational efforts to promote the ethical management of autopsy procedures.

The effects of rudeness, experience, and perspective-taking on challenging premature closure after pediatric ICU physicians receive hand-off with the wrong diagnosis: a randomized controlled simulation trial

OBJECTIVES

Rudeness exposure has been shown to inhibit diagnostic performance. The effects of rudeness on challenging a handed-off diagnostic error has not been studied.

METHODS

This was a randomized controlled study of attending, fellow, and resident physicians in a tertiary care pediatric ICU. Participants underwent a standardized simulation that started with the wrong diagnosis in hand-off. The hand-off was randomized to neutral vs. rude. Participants were not informed of the randomization nor diagnostic error prior to the simulation. Perspective taking questionnaires were administrated for each participant. Primary outcome was challenging diagnostic error post-simulation. Secondary outcomes included rate and frequency of diagnostic error challenge during simulation.

RESULTS

Among 41 simulations (16 residents, 14 fellows, and 11 attendings), the neutral group challenged the diagnostic error more than the rude group (neutral: 71%, rude: 55%, p=0.28). The magnitude of this trend was larger among resident physicians only, although not statistically significant (neutral: 50%, rude: 12.5%, p=0.11). Experience was associated with a higher percentage of challenging diagnostic error (residents: 31%, fellows: 86%, attendings: 82%, p=0.003). Experienced physicians were faster to challenge diagnostic error (p<0.0003), and experience was associated with a greater frequency of diagnostic error challenges (p<0.0001). High perspective taking scores were also associated with 1.63 times more diagnostic error challenges (p=0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Experience was strongly associated with likelihood to challenge diagnostic error. Rudeness may disproportionally hinder diagnostic performance among less experienced physicians. Perspective taking merits further research in possibly reducing diagnostic error momentum.

Frequency, Risk Factors, Causes, and Consequences of Diagnostic Errors in Critically Ill Medical Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

Diagnostic errors are a source of significant morbidity and mortality but understudied in the critically ill. We sought to characterize the frequency, causes, consequences, and risk factors of diagnostic errors among unplanned ICU admissions.

DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of randomly selected nonsurgical ICU admissions between July 2015 and June 2016.

SETTING

Medical ICU at a tertiary academic medical center.

SUBJECTS

Critically ill adults with unplanned admission to the medical ICU.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary investigator reviewed patient records using a modified version of the Safer Dx instrument, a validated instrument for detecting diagnostic error. Two intensivists performed secondary reviews of possible errors, and reviewers met periodically to adjudicate errors by consensus. For each confirmed error, we judged harm on a 1-6 rating scale. We also collected detailed demographic and clinical data for each patient. We analyzed 256 unplanned ICU admissions and identified 18 diagnostic errors (7% of admissions). All errors were associated with harm, and only six errors (33%) were recognized by the ICU team within the first 24 hours. More women than men experienced a diagnostic error (11.7% vs 2.7%; p = 0.015, χ test). On multivariable logistic regression analysis, female sex remained independently associated with risk of diagnostic error both at admission (odds ratio, 5.18; 95% CI, 1.34-20.08) and at 24 hours (odds ratio, 11.6; 95% CI, 1.37-98.6). Similarly, Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score greater than or equal to 2 at admission was independently associated with diagnostic error (odds ratio, 5.73; 95% CI, 1.72-19.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic errors may be an underappreciated source of ICU-related harm. Women and higher acuity patients appear to be at increased risk for such errors. Further research is merited to define the scope of error-associated harm and to clarify risk factors for diagnostic errors among the critically ill.

Rate of diagnostic errors and serious misdiagnosis-related harms for major vascular events, infections, and cancers: toward a national incidence estimate using the “Big Three”

Background

Missed vascular events, infections, and cancers account for ~75% of serious harms from diagnostic errors. Just 15 diseases from these “Big Three” categories account for nearly half of all serious misdiagnosis-related harms in malpractice claims. As part of a larger project estimating total US burden of serious misdiagnosis-related harms, we performed a focused literature review to measure diagnostic error and harm rates for these 15 conditions.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Google, and cited references. For errors, we selected high-quality, modern, US-based studies, if available, and best available evidence otherwise. For harms, we used literature-based estimates of the generic (disease-agnostic) rate of serious harms (morbidity/mortality) per diagnostic error and applied claims-based severity weights to construct disease-specific rates. Results were validated via expert review and comparison to prior literature that used different methods. We used Monte Carlo analysis to construct probabilistic plausible ranges (PPRs) around estimates.

Results

Rates for the 15 diseases were drawn from 28 published studies representing 91,755 patients. Diagnostic error (false negative) rates ranged from 2.2% (myocardial infarction) to 62.1% (spinal abscess), with a median of 13.6% [interquartile range (IQR) 9.2–24.7] and an aggregate mean of 9.7% (PPR 8.2–12.3). Serious misdiagnosis-related harm rates per incident disease case ranged from 1.2% (myocardial infarction) to 35.6% (spinal abscess), with a median of 5.5% (IQR 4.6–13.6) and an aggregate mean of 5.2% (PPR 4.5–6.7). Rates were considered face valid by domain experts and consistent with prior literature reports.

Conclusions

Diagnostic improvement initiatives should focus on dangerous conditions with higher diagnostic error and misdiagnosis-related harm rates.

Factors Associated With Diagnostic Error on Admission to a PICU: A Pilot Study

OBJECTIVES

Diagnostic errors can harm critically ill children. However, we know little about their prevalence in PICUs and factors associated with error. The objective of this pilot study was to determine feasibility of record review to identify patient, provider, and work system factors associated with diagnostic errors during the first 12 hours after PICU admission.

DESIGN

Pilot retrospective cohort study with structured record review using a structured tool (Safer Dx instrument) to identify diagnostic error.

SETTING

Academic tertiary referral PICU.

PATIENTS

Patients 0-17 years old admitted nonelectively to the PICU.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Four of 50 patients (8%) had diagnostic errors in the first 12 hours after admission. The Safer Dx instrument helped identify delayed diagnoses of chronic ear infection, increased intracranial pressure (two cases), and Bartonella encephalitis. We calculated that 610 PICU admissions are needed to achieve 80% power (α = 0.05) to detect significant associations with error.

CONCLUSIONS

Our pilot study found four patients with diagnostic error out of 50 children admitted nonelectively to a PICU. Retrospective record review using a structured tool to identify diagnostic errors is feasible in this population. Pilot data are being used to inform a larger and more definitive multicenter study.

Undiagnosed and Rare Diseases in Perinatal Medicine: Lessons in Context and Cognitive Diagnostic Error

Critically ill neonates experience high rates of morbidity and mortality. Major diagnostic errors are identified in up to 20% of autopsied neonatal intensive care unit deaths. Neonates with undiagnosed or rare congenital disorders may mimic critically ill neonates with more common acquired conditions. The context of the diagnostic evaluation can introduce unique biases that increase the likelihood of diagnostic error. Herein is presented a framework for understanding diagnostic errors in perinatal medicine, and individual, team, and systems-based solutions for improving diagnosis learned through the implementation and administration of an undiagnosed and rare disease program.

Diagnostic errors in the neonatal intensive care unit: State of the science and new directions

Diagnostic errors remain understudied in neonatology. The limited available evidence, however, suggests that diagnostic errors in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) result in significant and long-term consequences. In this narrative review, we discuss how the concept of diagnostic errors framed as missed opportunities can be applied to the non-linear nature of diagnosis in a critical care environment such as the NICU. We then explore how the etiology of an error in diagnosis can be related to both individual cognitive factors as well as organizational and systemic factors - all of which often contribute to the error. This multifactorial causation has limited the development of methodology to measure diagnostic errors as well as strategies to mitigate and prevent their adverse effects. We recommend research focused on the frequency and etiology of diagnostic error in the NICU as well as potential mitigation strategies to advance this important field in neonatal intensive care.

Improving Diagnostic Fidelity: An Approach to Standardizing the Process in Patients With Emerging Critical Illness

OBJECTIVE

To reliably improve diagnostic fidelity and identify delays using a standardized approach applied to the electronic medical records of patients with emerging critical illness.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective observational study at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, conducted June 1, 2016, to June 30, 2017, used a standard operating procedure applied to electronic medical records to identify variations in diagnostic fidelity and/or delay in adult patients with a rapid response team evaluation, at risk for critical illness. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified predictors and compared outcomes for those with and without varying diagnostic fidelity and/or delay.

RESULTS

The sample included 130 patients. Median age was 65 years (interquartile range, 56-76 years), and 47.0% (52 of 130) were women. Clinically significant diagnostic error or delay was agreed in 23 (17.7%) patients (κ=0.57; 95% CI, 0.40-0.74). Median age was 65.4 years (interquartile range, 60.3-74.8) and 9 of the 23 (30.1%) were female. Of those with diagnostic error or delay, 60.9% (14 of 23) died in the hospital compared with 19.6% (21 of 107) without; P<.001. Diagnostic error or delay was associated with higher Charlson comorbidity index score, cardiac arrest triage score, and do not intubate/do not resuscitate status. Adjusting for age, do not intubate/do not resuscitate status, and Charlson comorbidity index score, diagnostic error or delay was associated with increased mortality; odds ratio, 5.7; 95% CI, 2.0-17.8.

CONCLUSION

Diagnostic errors or delays can be reliably identified and are associated with higher comorbidity burden and increased mortality.

Serious misdiagnosis-related harms in malpractice claims: The “Big Three” – vascular events, infections, and cancers

Background

Diagnostic errors cause substantial preventable harm, but national estimates vary widely from 40,000 to 4 million annually. This cross-sectional analysis of a large medical malpractice claims database was the first phase of a three-phase project to estimate the US burden of serious misdiagnosis-related harms.

Methods

We sought to identify diseases accounting for the majority of serious misdiagnosis-related harms (morbidity/mortality). Diagnostic error cases were identified from Controlled Risk Insurance Company (CRICO)’s Comparative Benchmarking System (CBS) database (2006–2015), representing 28.7% of all US malpractice claims. Diseases were grouped according to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Clinical Classifications Software (CCS) that aggregates the International Classification of Diseases diagnostic codes into clinically sensible groupings. We analyzed vascular events, infections, and cancers (the “Big Three”), including frequency, severity, and settings. High-severity (serious) harms were defined by scores of 6–9 (serious, permanent disability, or death) on the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) Severity of Injury Scale.

Results

From 55,377 closed claims, we analyzed 11,592 diagnostic error cases [median age 49, interquartile range (IQR) 36–60; 51.7% female]. These included 7379 with high-severity harms (53.0% death). The Big Three diseases accounted for 74.1% of high-severity cases (vascular events 22.8%, infections 13.5%, and cancers 37.8%). In aggregate, the top five from each category (n = 15 diseases) accounted for 47.1% of high-severity cases. The most frequent disease in each category, respectively, was stroke, sepsis, and lung cancer. Causes were disproportionately clinical judgment factors (85.7%) across categories (range 82.0–88.8%).

Conclusions

The Big Three diseases account for about three-fourths of serious misdiagnosis-related harms. Initial efforts to improve diagnosis should focus on vascular events, infections, and cancers.

The Value of Autopsy in Neonates in the 21st Century

BACKGROUND

Autopsy rates in neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) patients who died are declining worldwide. Postmortem magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is suggested as adjunct to or substitute for autopsy.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper was to determine the additional diagnostic value of autopsy in NICU patients and whether autopsy findings were potentially detectable using postmortem MRI.

METHODS

From 2008 to 2015, 298 infants died during admission to our NICU. Permission for unrestricted, nonforensic autopsy was obtained in 100 (33.6%) of these 298 infants. Retrospectively, autopsy reports and medical records of NICU patients were compared. Additional autopsy findings were graded according to the Goldman system, grading the clinical relevance of additional findings. In addition, the potential detectability of these additional findings on postmortem MRI was assessed.

RESULTS

Additional findings obtained by autopsy were found in 48% of the cases, divided into major (Goldman I/II, 24%) and minor (Goldman III/IV, 24%) additional findings. Major additional findings were significantly more often found in patients with a lower gestational age, and minor additional findings in patients with a higher postnatal age at death. Of all patients with additional findings determined by autopsy, 56.3% would most likely not have been detected using postmortem MRI.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results emphasize the still very important role of autopsy in the NICU setting and show that conventional autopsy could probably not be completely substituted by postmortem MRI.

Diagnostic Errors in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: A Case Series

Diagnostic errors remain understudied in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). The few available studies are primarily autopsy-based, and do not evaluate diagnostic errors that did not result in the patient's death. This case series presents 10 examples of nonlethal diagnostic errors in the NICU-classified according to the component of the diagnostic process which led to the error. These cases demonstrate the presence of diagnostic error in the NICU and highlight the need for further research on this important topic.

Diagnostic errors in paediatric cardiac intensive care

IntroductionDiagnostic errors cause significant patient harm and increase costs. Data characterising such errors in the paediatric cardiac intensive care population are limited. We sought to understand the perceived frequency and types of diagnostic errors in the paediatric cardiac ICU.

METHODS

Paediatric cardiac ICU practitioners including attending and trainee physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and registered nurses at three North American tertiary cardiac centres were surveyed between October 2014 and January 2015.

RESULTS

The response rate was 46% (N=200). Most respondents (81%) perceived that diagnostic errors harm patients more than five times per year. More than half (65%) reported that errors permanently harm patients, and up to 18% perceived that diagnostic errors contributed to death or severe permanent harm more than five times per year. Medication side effects and psychiatric conditions were thought to be most commonly misdiagnosed. Physician groups also ranked pulmonary overcirculation and viral illness to be commonly misdiagnosed as bacterial illness. Inadequate care coordination, data assessment, and high clinician workload were cited as contributory factors. Delayed diagnostic studies and interventions related to the severity of the patient's condition were thought to be the most commonly reported process breakdowns. All surveyed groups ranked improving teamwork and feedback pathways as strategies to explore for preventing future diagnostic errors.

CONCLUSIONS

Paediatric cardiac intensive care practitioners perceive that diagnostic errors causing permanent harm are common and associated more with systematic and process breakdowns than with cognitive limitations.

Symptom-Disease Pair Analysis of Diagnostic Error (SPADE): a conceptual framework and methodological approach for unearthing misdiagnosis-related harms using big data

BACKGROUND

The public health burden associated with diagnostic errors is likely enormous, with some estimates suggesting millions of individuals are harmed each year in the USA, and presumably many more worldwide. According to the US National Academy of Medicine, improving diagnosis in healthcare is now considered 'a moral, professional, and public health imperative.' Unfortunately, well-established, valid and readily available operational measures of diagnostic performance and misdiagnosis-related harms are lacking, hampering progress. Existing methods often rely on judging errors through labour-intensive human reviews of medical records that are constrained by poor clinical documentation, low reliability and hindsight bias.

METHODS

Key gaps in operational measurement might be filled via thoughtful statistical analysis of existing large clinical, billing, administrative claims or similar data sets. In this manuscript, we describe a method to quantify and monitor diagnostic errors using an approach we call 'Symptom-Disease Pair Analysis of Diagnostic Error' (SPADE).

RESULTS

We first offer a conceptual framework for establishing valid symptom-disease pairs illustrated using the well-known diagnostic error dyad of dizziness-stroke. We then describe analytical methods for both look-back (case-control) and look-forward (cohort) measures of diagnostic error and misdiagnosis-related harms using 'big data'. After discussing the strengths and limitations of the SPADE approach by comparing it to other strategies for detecting diagnostic errors, we identify the sources of validity and reliability that undergird our approach.

CONCLUSION

SPADE-derived metrics could eventually be used for operational diagnostic performance dashboards and national benchmarking. This approach has the potential to transform diagnostic quality and safety across a broad range of clinical problems and settings.

Dutch guideline for clinical foetal-neonatal and paediatric post-mortem radiology, including a review of literature

Clinical post-mortem radiology is a relatively new field of expertise and not common practice in most hospitals yet. With the declining numbers of autopsies and increasing demand for quality control of clinical care, post-mortem radiology can offer a solution, or at least be complementary. A working group consisting of radiologists, pathologists and other clinical medical specialists reviewed and evaluated the literature on the diagnostic value of post-mortem conventional radiography (CR), ultrasonography, computed tomography (PMCT), magnetic resonance imaging (PMMRI), and minimally invasive autopsy (MIA). Evidence tables were built and subsequently a Dutch national evidence-based guideline for post-mortem radiology was developed. We present this evaluation of the radiological modalities in a clinical post-mortem setting, including MIA, as well as the recently published Dutch guidelines for post-mortem radiology in foetuses, neonates, and children. In general, for post-mortem radiology modalities, PMMRI is the modality of choice in foetuses, neonates, and infants, whereas PMCT is advised in older children. There is a limited role for post-mortem CR and ultrasonography. In most cases, conventional autopsy will remain the diagnostic method of choice.

CONCLUSION

Based on a literature review and clinical expertise, an evidence-based guideline was developed for post-mortem radiology of foetal, neonatal, and paediatric patients. What is Known: • Post-mortem investigations serve as a quality check for the provided health care and are important for reliable epidemiological registration. • Post-mortem radiology, sometimes combined with minimally invasive techniques, is considered as an adjunct or alternative to autopsy. What is New: • We present the Dutch guidelines for post-mortem radiology in foetuses, neonates and children. • Autopsy remains the reference standard, however minimal invasive autopsy with a skeletal survey, post-mortem computed tomography, or post-mortem magnetic resonance imaging can be complementary thereof.

Management of asymptomatic neonates born in the setting of chorioamnionitis: a safety comparison of the well-baby and intensive care setting

BACKGROUND

Evaluate the safety of a change in care setting for asymptomatic neonates born to mothers with chorioamnionitis from the neonatal intensive care unit to the well baby nursery.Local problem:The neonatal intensive care unit evaluation and management of babies born to mothers with chorioamionitis often involves separation of the mother-baby dyad and more invasive interventions.

METHODS

A single-center pre/post-intervention study of neonates born from January 2011 to November 2016, comparing safety outcomes in the neonatal intensive care unit (pre-intervention) and well baby nursery (post-intervention), following initiation of a triage protocol.

INTERVENTIONS

A protocolized, systematic change was done in the practice location.

RESULTS

Groups were similar for time to first antibiotic administration, sepsis symptom development and positive blood cultures. Length of stay (median 73.5 vs 64.4 h, P=0.0192) and % of neonates with intravenous fluid exposure (50.4% vs 7.6%, P<0.0001) were lower in the post-intervention group. Exclusive breastfeeding rates improved (pre-7.3% vs post-46.1%, P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Asymptomatic neonates born to mothers with chorioamnionitis were safely treated in a well baby nursery under the guidance of a protocol for triage, thereby reducing NICU exposure for these neonates.

Autopsy interrogation of emergency medicine dispute cases: how often are clinical diagnoses incorrect?

AIMS

Emergency medicine is a 'high risk' specialty. Some diseases develop suddenly and progress rapidly, and sudden unexpected deaths in the emergency department (ED) may cause medical disputes. We aimed to assess discrepancies between antemortem clinical diagnoses and postmortem autopsy findings concerning emergency medicine dispute cases and to figure out the most common major missed diagnoses.

METHODS

Clinical files and autopsy reports were retrospectively analysed and interpreted. Discrepancies between clinical diagnoses and autopsy diagnoses were evaluated using modified Goldman classification as major and minor discrepancy. The difference between diagnosis groups was compared with Pearson χ² test.

RESULTS

Of the 117 cases included in this study, 71 of cases (58 class I and 13 class II diagnostic errors) were revealed as major discrepancies (60.7%). The most common major diagnoses were cardiovascular diseases (54 cases), followed by pulmonary diseases, infectious diseases and so on. The difference of major discrepancy between the diagnoses groups was significant (p<0.001). Aortic dissection and myocardial infarction were the most common cause of death (15 cases for each disease) and the most common missed class I diagnoses (80% and 66.7% for each), higher than the average 49.6% of all class I errors of the study patients.

CONCLUSIONS

High major disparities between clinical diagnoses and postmortem examinations exist in emergency medical disputes cases; acute aortic dissection and myocardial infarction are the most frequently major missed diagnoses that ED clinicians should pay special attention to in practice. This study reaffirmed the necessity and usefulness of autopsy in auditing death in EDs.

Diagnostic Accuracy of a Host Gene Expression Signature That Discriminates Clinical Severe Sepsis Syndrome and Infection-Negative Systemic Inflammation Among Critically Ill Children

OBJECTIVES

SeptiCyte Lab (Immunexpress, Seattle, WA), a molecular signature measuring the relative expression levels of four host messenger RNAs, was developed to discriminate critically ill adults with infection-positive versus infection-negative systemic inflammation. The objective was to assess the performance of Septicyte Lab in critically ill pediatric patients.

DESIGN

Prospective observational study.

SETTING

Pediatric and Cardiac ICUs, Seattle Children's Hospital, Seattle, WA.

PATIENTS

A cohort of 40 children with clinically overt severe sepsis syndrome and 30 children immediately postcardiopulmonary bypass surgery was recruited. The clinically overt severe sepsis syndrome children had confirmed or highly suspected infection (microbial culture orders, antimicrobial prescription), two or more systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria (including temperature and leukocyte criteria), and at least cardiovascular ± pulmonary organ dysfunction.

INTERVENTIONS

None (observational study only).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Next-generation RNA sequencing was conducted on PAXgene blood RNA samples, successfully for 35 of 40 (87.5%) of the clinically overt severe sepsis syndrome patients and 29 of 30 (96.7%) of the postcardiopulmonary bypass patients. Forty patient samples (~ 60% of cohort) were reanalyzed by reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction, to check for concordance with next-generation sequencing results. Postcardiopulmonary bypass versus clinically overt severe sepsis syndrome descriptors included the following: age, 7.3 ± 5.5 versus 9.0 ± 6.6 years; gender, 41% versus 49% male; Pediatric Risk of Mortality, version III, 7.0 ± 4.6 versus 8.7 ± 6.4; Pediatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction, version II, 5.1 ± 2.2 versus 4.8 ± 2.8. SeptiCyte Lab strongly differentiated postcardiopulmonary bypass and clinically overt severe sepsis syndrome patients by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, with an area-under-curve value of 0.99 (95% CI, 0.96-1.00). Equivalent performance was found using reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction. There was no significant correlation between the score produced by the SeptiCyte Lab test and measures of illness severity, immune compromise, or microbial culture status.

CONCLUSIONS

SeptiCyte Lab is able to discriminate clearly between clinically well-defined and homogeneous postcardiopulmonary bypass and clinically overt severe sepsis syndrome groups in children. A broader investigation among children with more heterogeneous inflammation-associated diagnoses and care settings is warranted.

Finding Diagnostic Errors in Children Admitted to the PICU

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether the Safer Dx Instrument, a structured tool for finding diagnostic errors in primary care, can be used to reliably detect diagnostic errors in patients admitted to a PICU.

DESIGN AND SETTING

The Safer Dx Instrument consists of 11 questions to evaluate the diagnostic process and a final question to determine if diagnostic error occurred. We used the instrument to analyze four "high-risk" patient cohorts admitted to the PICU between June 2013 and December 2013.

PATIENTS

High-risk cohorts were defined as cohort 1: patients who were autopsied; cohort 2: patients seen as outpatients within 2 weeks prior to PICU admission; cohort 3: patients transferred to PICU unexpectedly from an acute care floor after a rapid response and requiring vasoactive medications and/or endotracheal intubation due to decompensation within 24 hours; and cohort 4: patients transferred to PICU unexpectedly from an acute care floor after a rapid response without subsequent decompensation in 24 hours.

INTERVENTIONS

Two clinicians used the instrument to independently review records in each cohort for diagnostic errors, defined as missed opportunities to make a correct or timely diagnosis. Errors were confirmed by senior expert clinicians.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Diagnostic errors were present in 26 of 214 high-risk patient records (12.1%; 95% CI, 8.2-17.5%) with the following frequency distribution: cohort 1: two of 16 (12.5%); cohort 2: one of 41 (2.4%); cohort 3: 13 of 44 (29.5%); and cohort 4: 10 of 113 (8.8%). Overall initial reviewer agreement was 93.6% (κ, 0.72). Infections and neurologic conditions were the most commonly missed diagnoses across all high-risk cohorts (16/26).

CONCLUSIONS

The Safer Dx Instrument has high reliability and validity for diagnostic error detection when used in high-risk pediatric care settings. With further validation in additional clinical settings, it could be useful to enhance learning and feedback about diagnostic safety in children.

Discrepancies Between Clinical Diagnoses and Autopsy Findings in Critically Ill Children: A Prospective Study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the discrepancies between clinical and autopsy diagnoses in patients who died in the pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) of a tertiary care university hospital.

METHODS

A prospective study of all consecutive autopsies discussed at monthly mortality conferences over 5 years. Discrepancies between premortem and autopsy diagnoses were classified according to modified Goldman et al criteria.

RESULTS

From January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2015, a total of 2,679 children were admitted to the two PICUs of our hospital; 257 (9.6%) died, 150 (58.4%) underwent autopsy, and 123 were included. Complete concordance between clinical and postmortem diagnoses was observed in 86 (69.9%) patients; 20 (16.3%) had a class I discrepancy, and eight (6.5%) had a class II discrepancy. Comparing 2011 and 2015, the rate of major discrepancies decreased from 31.6% to 15%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results emphasize the importance of autopsy to clarify the cause of death and its potential contribution to improvement of team performance and quality of care.

A national physician survey of diagnostic error in paediatrics

This cross-sectional survey explored paediatric physician perspectives regarding diagnostic errors. All paediatric consultants and specialist registrars in Ireland were invited to participate in this anonymous online survey. The response rate for the study was 54 % (n = 127). Respondents had a median of 9-year clinical experience (interquartile range (IQR) 4-20 years). A diagnostic error was reported at least monthly by 19 (15.0 %) respondents. Consultants reported significantly less diagnostic errors compared to trainees (p value = 0.01). Cognitive error was the top-ranked contributing factor to diagnostic error, with incomplete history and examination considered to be the principal cognitive error. Seeking a second opinion and close follow-up of patients to ensure that the diagnosis is correct were the highest-ranked, clinician-based solutions to diagnostic error. Inadequate staffing levels and excessive workload were the most highly ranked system-related and situational factors. Increased access to and availability of consultants and experts was the most highly ranked system-based solution to diagnostic error.

CONCLUSION

We found a low level of self-perceived diagnostic error in an experienced group of paediatricians, at variance with the literature and warranting further clarification. The results identify perceptions on the major cognitive, system-related and situational factors contributing to diagnostic error and also key preventative strategies.

WHAT IS KNOWN

• Diagnostic errors are an important source of preventable patient harm and have an estimated incidence of 10-15 %. • They are multifactorial in origin and include cognitive, system-related and situational factors. What is New: • We identified a low rate of self-perceived diagnostic error in contrast to the existing literature. • Incomplete history and examination, inadequate staffing levels and excessive workload are cited as the principal contributing factors to diagnostic error in this study.

Role of the Medical Examiner in Zika Virus and Other Emerging Infections

CONTEXT

-Medical examiners and coroners have long been an integral component of public health, often being the first to recognize and describe emerging infectious diseases. Given their experience and access, medical examiners and coroners will provide valuable contributions to better understanding Zika virus infection and its sequelae.

OBJECTIVE

-To review past examples of medical examiner/coroner involvement in recognition of emerging infectious diseases and describe how medical examiners and coroners will be critical in understanding the pathophysiology of Zika infections.

DESIGN

-Review of the existing literature on the role of medical examiners and coroners in the identification of emergent infections and the available literature on Zika virus.

RESULTS

-Medical examiners and coroners have played a crucial role in identifying numerous emerging infectious diseases such as hantavirus pulmonary syndrome and West Nile virus, and have the expertise and experience to aid in elucidating the pathophysiologic effects of Zika virus and tracking its distribution and risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

-Medical examiners and coroners will be a significant factor in the unified public health approach needed to mitigate the effects of Zika virus and other, heretofore unrecognized, infectious diseases.

Changes in cognitive function after pediatric intensive care unit rounds: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Mental fatigue is impaired cognitive function induced by engaging in cognitively demanding activities. Pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) rounds are demanding and may be a cause of impaired cognitive functioning. The purpose of this study is to evaluate if PICU rounds induce poorer performance on cognitive tasks after rounds compared to before rounds and assess the feasibility of cognitive testing in the PICU.

METHODS

This was a prospective study of residents in the PICU. Participants were evaluated before and after rounds on a single day, consisting of two tests of cognitive function that are sensitive to mental fatigue, the cognitive estimation test (CET) and the repeatable episodic memory test (REMT).

RESULTS

Thirty residents participated. The mean length of rounds was 191 min (SD 33.8 min), the mean number of patients rounded on by the team was 14.9 (SD 2.3) and the median patients presented by the participant was two (range 0-6). The average number of words recalled on the REMT was significantly lower after rounds compared to before (29.6 vs. 31.2, p < 0.05). There were significantly more falsely recalled words after rounds (1.3 vs. 0.7, p=0.02). There was a correlation between worsening performance and later time of testing in the 4-week PICU rotation (r=0.42, p < 0.02). There were no differences in performance on the CET.

CONCLUSIONS

PICU rounds induced impairments on cognitive testing but the effect size is small and not consistent across tests. There is an increased susceptibility to impaired cognition induced by rounds over the course of a rotation, this finding merits further investigation.

The Morbidity and Mortality Conference in Pediatric Intensive Care as a Means for Improving Patient Safety

OBJECTIVES

To present our experience in an interdisciplinary and interprofessional morbidity and mortality conference, with special emphasis on its usefulness in improving patient safety.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis.

SETTING

Tertiary interdisciplinary neonatal PICU.

PATIENTS

Morbidity and mortality conference minutes on 48 patients (newborns to 17 yr), January 2009 to June 2014.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The authors' PICU implemented a morbidity and mortality conference guideline in 2009 using a system-based approach to identify medical errors, their contributing factors, and possible solutions. In the subsequent 5.5 years, there were 44 mortality conferences (of 181 deaths [27%] over the same period) and four morbidity conferences. The median death/morbidity event-morbidity and mortality conference interval was 90 days (range, 7 d to 1.5 yr). The median age of patients was 4 months (range, newborn to 17 years). In six cases, the primary reason for PICU admission was a treatment complication. Unsafe processes/medical errors were identified and discussed in 37 morbidity and mortality conferences (77%). In seven cases, new autopsy findings prompted the discussion of a possible error. The 48 morbidity and mortality conferences identified 50 errors, including 30 in which an interface problem was a contributing factor. Fifty-four improvements were identified in 34 morbidity and mortality conferences. Four morbidity and mortality conferences discussed specific ethical issues.

CONCLUSIONS

From our experience, we have found that the interdisciplinary and interprofessional morbidity and mortality conference has the potential to reveal unsafe processes/medical errors, in particular, diagnostic and communication errors and interface problems. When formatted as a nonhierarchical tool inviting contributions from all staff levels, the morbidity and mortality conference plays a key role in the system approach to medical errors.

Diagnostic Errors in a PICU: Insights From the Morbidity and Mortality Conference

OBJECTIVES

To describe diagnostic errors identified among patients discussed at a PICU morbidity and mortality conference in terms of Goldman classification, medical category, severity, preventability, contributing factors, and occurrence in the diagnostic process.

DESIGN

Retrospective record review of morbidity and mortality conference agendas, patient charts, and autopsy reports.

SETTING

Single tertiary referral PICU in Baltimore, MD.

PATIENTS

Ninety-six patients discussed at the PICU morbidity and mortality conference from November 2011 to December 2012.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Eighty-nine of 96 patients (93%) discussed at the PICU morbidity and mortality conference had at least one identified safety event. A total of 377 safety events were identified. Twenty patients (21%) had identified misdiagnoses, comprising 5.3% of all safety events. Out of 20 total diagnostic errors identified, 35% were discovered at autopsy while 55% were reported primarily through the morbidity and mortality conference. Almost all diagnostic errors (95%) could have had an impact on patient survival or safety. Forty percent of errors did not cause actual patient harm, but 25% were severe enough to have potentially contributed to death (40% no harm vs 35% some harm vs 25% possibly contributed to death). Half of the diagnostic errors (50%) were rated as preventable. There were slightly more system-related factors (40%) solely contributing to diagnostic errors compared with cognitive factors (20%); however, 35% had both system and cognitive factors playing a role. Most errors involved vascular (35%) followed by neurologic (30%) events.

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic errors in the PICU are not uncommon and potentially cause patient harm. Most appear to be preventable by targeting both cognitive- and system-related contributing factors. Prospective studies are needed to further determine how and why diagnostic errors occur in the PICU and what interventions would likely be effective for prevention.