{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Checklists to reduce diagnostic error: a systematic review of the literature using a human factors framework.
{Author}: Al-Khafaji J;Townsend RF;Townsend W;Chopra V;Gupta A;
{Journal}: BMJ Open
{Volume}: 12
{Issue}: 4
{Year}: 04 2022 29
{Factor}: 3.006
{DOI}: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058219
{Abstract}: To apply a human factors framework to understand whether checklists reduce clinical diagnostic error have (1) gaps in composition; and (2) components that may be more likely to reduce errors.<BR>Systematic review.<BR>PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science were searched through 15 February 2022.<BR>Any article that included a clinical checklist aimed at improving the diagnostic process. Checklists were defined as any structured guide intended to elicit additional thinking regarding diagnosis.<BR>Two authors independently reviewed and selected articles based on eligibility criteria. Each extracted unique checklist was independently characterised according to the well-established human factors framework: Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety 2.0 (SEIPS 2.0). If reported, checklist efficacy in reducing diagnostic error (eg, diagnostic accuracy, number of errors or any patient-related outcomes) was outlined. Risk of study bias was independently evaluated using standardised quality assessment tools in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.<BR>A total of 30 articles containing 25 unique checklists were included. Checklists were characterised within the SEIPS 2.0 framework as follows: Work Systems subcomponents of Tasks (n=13), Persons (n=2) and Internal Environment (n=3); Processes subcomponents of Cognitive (n=20) and Social and Behavioural (n=2); and Outcomes subcomponents of Professional (n=2). Other subcomponents, such as External Environment or Patient outcomes, were not addressed. Fourteen checklists examined effect on diagnostic outcomes: seven demonstrated improvement, six were without improvement and one demonstrated mixed results. Importantly, Tasks-oriented studies more often demonstrated error reduction (n=5/7) than those addressing the Cognitive process (n=4/10).<BR>Most diagnostic checklists incorporated few human factors components. Checklists addressing the SEIPS 2.0 Tasks subcomponent were more often associated with a reduction in diagnostic errors. Studies examining less explored subcomponents and emphasis on Tasks, rather than the Cognitive subcomponents, may be warranted to prevent diagnostic errors.