Prevalence of atypical presentations among outpatients and associations with diagnostic error.

IF 2.2 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Diagnosis Pub Date : 2023-12-08 eCollection Date: 2024-02-01 DOI:10.1515/dx-2023-0060
Yukinori Harada, Yumi Otaka, Shinichi Katsukura, Taro Shimizu
{"title":"Prevalence of atypical presentations among outpatients and associations with diagnostic error.","authors":"Yukinori Harada, Yumi Otaka, Shinichi Katsukura, Taro Shimizu","doi":"10.1515/dx-2023-0060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to assess the prevalence of atypical presentations and their association with diagnostic errors in various diseases.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective observational study was conducted using cohort data between January 1 and December 31, 2019. Consecutive outpatients consulted by physicians from the Department of Diagnostic and Generalist Medicine at a university hospital in Japan were included. Patients for whom the final diagnosis was not confirmed were excluded. Primary outcomes were the prevalence of atypical presentations, and the prevalence of diagnostic errors in groups with typical and atypical presentations. Diagnostic errors and atypical presentations were assessed using the Revised Safer Dx Instrument. We performed primary analyses using a criterion; the average score of less than five to item 12 of two independent reviewers was an atypical presentation (liberal criterion). We also performed additional analyses using another criterion; the average score of three or less to item 12 was an atypical presentation (conservative criterion).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 930 patients were included out of a total of 2022 eligible. The prevalence of atypical presentation was 21.7 and 6.7 % when using liberal and conservative criteria for atypical presentation, respectively. Diagnostic errors (2.8 %) were most commonly observed in the cases with slight to moderate atypical presentation. Atypical presentation was associated with diagnostic errors with the liberal criterion for atypical presentation; however, this diminished with the conservative criterion.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>An atypical presentation was observed in up to 20 % of outpatients with a confirmed diagnosis, and slight to moderate atypical presentation may be the highest risk population for diagnostic errors.</p>","PeriodicalId":11273,"journal":{"name":"Diagnosis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnosis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2023-0060","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the prevalence of atypical presentations and their association with diagnostic errors in various diseases.

Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted using cohort data between January 1 and December 31, 2019. Consecutive outpatients consulted by physicians from the Department of Diagnostic and Generalist Medicine at a university hospital in Japan were included. Patients for whom the final diagnosis was not confirmed were excluded. Primary outcomes were the prevalence of atypical presentations, and the prevalence of diagnostic errors in groups with typical and atypical presentations. Diagnostic errors and atypical presentations were assessed using the Revised Safer Dx Instrument. We performed primary analyses using a criterion; the average score of less than five to item 12 of two independent reviewers was an atypical presentation (liberal criterion). We also performed additional analyses using another criterion; the average score of three or less to item 12 was an atypical presentation (conservative criterion).

Results: A total of 930 patients were included out of a total of 2022 eligible. The prevalence of atypical presentation was 21.7 and 6.7 % when using liberal and conservative criteria for atypical presentation, respectively. Diagnostic errors (2.8 %) were most commonly observed in the cases with slight to moderate atypical presentation. Atypical presentation was associated with diagnostic errors with the liberal criterion for atypical presentation; however, this diminished with the conservative criterion.

Conclusions: An atypical presentation was observed in up to 20 % of outpatients with a confirmed diagnosis, and slight to moderate atypical presentation may be the highest risk population for diagnostic errors.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
门诊患者中非典型症状的患病率及其与诊断错误的关系。
目的:本研究旨在评估非典型表现的患病率及其与各种疾病诊断错误的关系。方法:本回顾性观察研究使用2019年1月1日至12月31日的队列数据进行。包括日本一所大学医院诊断和综合医学系医生连续咨询的门诊患者。未确诊的患者被排除在外。主要结局是非典型表现的患病率,以及典型和非典型表现组中诊断错误的患病率。使用修订后的Safer Dx仪器评估诊断错误和非典型表现。我们使用一个标准进行了初步分析;两名独立评论者对第12项的平均得分低于5分是一种非典型的表现(自由标准)。我们还使用另一个标准进行了额外的分析;第12项的平均得分为3分或更少为非典型表现(保守标准)。结果:共有930名患者从2022名符合条件的患者中被纳入。当使用自由和保守的非典型表现标准时,非典型表现的患病率分别为21.7%和6.7% %。诊断错误(2.8 %)最常见于轻度至中度不典型表现的病例。非典型表现与非典型表现的自由标准诊断错误相关;然而,这种情况在保守标准下有所减少。结论:在确诊的门诊患者中,不典型表现高达20% %,轻微至中度不典型表现可能是诊断错误的最高风险人群。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Diagnosis
Diagnosis MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
5.70%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Diagnosis focuses on how diagnosis can be advanced, how it is taught, and how and why it can fail, leading to diagnostic errors. The journal welcomes both fundamental and applied works, improvement initiatives, opinions, and debates to encourage new thinking on improving this critical aspect of healthcare quality.  Topics: -Factors that promote diagnostic quality and safety -Clinical reasoning -Diagnostic errors in medicine -The factors that contribute to diagnostic error: human factors, cognitive issues, and system-related breakdowns -Improving the value of diagnosis – eliminating waste and unnecessary testing -How culture and removing blame promote awareness of diagnostic errors -Training and education related to clinical reasoning and diagnostic skills -Advances in laboratory testing and imaging that improve diagnostic capability -Local, national and international initiatives to reduce diagnostic error
期刊最新文献
Lessons in clinical reasoning - pitfalls, myths, and pearls: a case of persistent dysphagia and patient partnership. Root cause analysis of cases involving diagnosis. A delayed diagnosis of hyperthyroidism in a patient with persistent vomiting in the presence of Chiari type 1 malformation. Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies evaluating glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolase L1 (UCHL1) as blood biomarkers of mild acute traumatic brain injury (mTBI) or sport-related concussion (SRC) in adult subjects. Bridging the divide: addressing discrepancies between clinical guidelines, policy guidelines, and biomarker utilization.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1