diagnostic error

诊断错误
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    临床推理是有效临床实践的基础。用于教学临床推理的传统咨询模型或用于教学生如何做出诊断或管理计划的常规方法,仅依靠通过观察来学习,越来越被认为是不够的。随着时间的推移以及跨不同的临床表现和背景,支持学习者发展临床推理也存在许多挑战。专家和新手如何理解临床信息的差异加剧了这些挑战,以及使用精确的医学语言处理和传达这些信息时使用的不同认知过程。诊断错误可能是由于认知偏见,但也是,在大多数情况下,由于缺乏临床知识。因此,发展临床推理的有效教育策略包括识别学习者的知识差距,使用有效的例子来防止认知过载,促进关键特征的使用,并实践准确的问题表示的构建。还建议对诊断理由进行深思熟虑的思考,总的来说,有助于越来越多的基于证据和理论驱动的教育干预措施,以减少诊断错误和改善患者护理。
    Clinical reasoning is fundamental for effective clinical practice. Traditional consultation models for teaching clinical reasoning or conventional approaches for teaching students how to make a diagnosis or management plan that rely on learning through observation only, are increasingly recognised as insufficient. There are also many challenges to supporting learners in developing clinical reasoning over time as well as across different clinical presentations and contexts. These challenges are compounded by the differences in how experts and novices make sense of clinical information, and the different cognitive processes each use when processing and communicating this information using precise medical language. Diagnostic errors may be due to cognitive biases but also, in a majority of cases, due to a lack of clinical knowledge. Therefore, effective educational strategies to develop clinical reasoning include identifying learners\' knowledge gaps, using worked examples to prevent cognitive overload, promoting the use of key features and practising the construction of accurate problem representations. Deliberate reflection on diagnostic justification is also recommended, and overall, contributes to a growing number of evidence-based and theory-driven educational interventions for reducing diagnostic errors and improving patient care.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:生物变异是诊断不确定性的相关因素。除了主体内和主体间的变化,分析前变异还包括有助于生物变异性的成分。其中,每天重复,即,昼夜生理变化特别重要,因为如果不知道确切的采血时间,它包含随机和非随机成分。
    方法:我们介绍了被测量的昼夜变化的四个时间依赖性特征(TDC),以评估时间依赖性与实验室结果评估的相关性和程度。
    结果:TDC解决(i)考虑随机性的阈值,(ii)每个时间单位的预期相对变化,(iii)在不同的白天两次采血之间的允许时间间隔,在该时间间隔内,预期的时间依赖性不超过定义的分析不确定性,和(iv)节奏扩展参考变化值。TDC及其重要性将以天冬氨酸转氨酶为例,肌酸激酶,葡萄糖,促甲状腺激素,和总胆红素.TDC是针对四个反映已知采血时间表的时隙计算的,即,07:00-09:00、08:00-12:00、06:00-18:00和00:00-24:00。顶相的振幅和时间位置是影响诊断不确定性并因此影响医学解释的主要决定因素。特别是在典型的血液采集时间从07:00到09:00。
    结论:我们建议检查被测量是否存在昼夜变化,如果适用,指定它们在我们的概念中概述的时间依赖性特征。
    OBJECTIVE: Biological variation is a relevant component of diagnostic uncertainty. In addition to within-subject and between-subject variation, preanalytical variation also includes components that contribute to biological variability. Among these, daily recurring, i.e., diurnal physiological variation is of particular importance, as it contains both a random and a non-random component if the exact time of blood collection is not known.
    METHODS: We introduce four time-dependent characteristics (TDC) of diurnal variations for measurands to assess the relevance and extent of time dependence on the evaluation of laboratory results.
    RESULTS: TDC address (i) a threshold for considering diurnality, (ii) the expected relative changes per time unit, (iii) the permissible time interval between two blood collections at different daytimes within which the expected time dependence does not exceed a defined analytical uncertainty, and (iv) a rhythm-expanded reference change value. TDC and their importance will be exemplified by the measurands aspartate aminotransferase, creatine kinase, glucose, thyroid stimulating hormone, and total bilirubin. TDCs are calculated for four time slots that reflect known blood collection schedules, i.e., 07:00-09:00, 08:00-12:00, 06:00-18:00, and 00:00-24:00. The amplitude and the temporal location of the acrophase are major determinates impacting the diagnostic uncertainty and thus the medical interpretation, especially within the typical blood collection time from 07:00 to 09:00.
    CONCLUSIONS: We propose to check measurands for the existence of diurnal variations and, if applicable, to specify their time-dependent characteristics as outlined in our concept.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • DOI:
    文章类型: Editorial
    直到1989年囊性纤维化(CF)基因的发现,诊断的发展是有限的,治疗侧重于症状缓解。然而,随着基因的突破,已鉴定出大约2,000个基因突变。最近,CF跨膜电导调节因子三联疗法(CFTRm)以三联疗法的形式引入了ivacaftor,lumacaftor和tezacaftor(ETI),美国从2019年开始,欧洲从2020年开始,澳大利亚从2021年开始。新的治疗选择彻底改变了许多被诊断患有CF的人的生活质量和预期寿命。这篇社论回顾了现在可以为患者提供的临床护理的主要发展,并反思了许多患者在医疗过失情况下改善状况的法律和道德后果,损害评估,家庭法和刑法。它还考虑了低收入和中等收入国家三联疗法的供应有限造成的获取和公平方面的困难问题。
    Until the discovery of the gene for cystic fibrosis (CF) in 1989, diagnostic developments were limited, and treatment focused on symptom alleviation. However, following the genetic breakthrough, some 2,000 mutations of the gene have been identified. More recently CF transmembrane conductance regulator modulator triple therapy (CFTRm) has been introduced in the form of triple therapy with ivacaftor, lumacaftor and tezacaftor (ETI), in the United States from 2019, Europe from 2020 and then Australia from 2021. The new treatment option has revolutionised both the quality of life and life expectancy of many persons diagnosed with CF. This editorial reviews major developments in the clinical care that can now be provided to patients, and reflects on the legal and ethical ramifications of the improved situation for many patients in the contexts of medical negligence, damages assessment, family law and criminal law. It also considers the difficult issues of access and equity caused by the limited availability of the triple therapy in low- and middle-income countries.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:非A非B(NANB)主动脉夹层是一种罕见且经常无法识别的疾病。然而,考虑到解剖主动脉的不可预测的行为,它们的正确识别至关重要,可能导致死亡率和发病率增加。我们研究了放射学计算机血管断层扫描(CTA)报告在急性NANB诊断中的准确性以及与延迟识别或误诊相关的风险。
    方法:对2017年1月至2023年5月在伦敦(UK)大学医院收治的所有连续急性主动脉夹层(AAD)患者的治疗前对比CTA进行回顾性审查,以回顾性验证CTA报告诊断NANBAAD的准确性(B1-2D与延迟诊断相关的风险(发病率,死亡率,和重新入院)被评估为次要结局。该研究是根据STROBE指南进行的。
    结果:总体而言,对588例主动脉CTA进行了检查,共检查n=393例(66.8%)A型AAD,n=171(29%)B型AAD和n=25(4.3%)NANBAAD(n=16,64%男性,平均年龄60.56,DS+/-14.6岁)。虽然在A型或B型AAD组中没有发现误诊的病例,在NANB中,只有大约三分之一的病例(n=9,36%)立即显示为“NANB”(n=2,8%)或“逆行延伸到足弓的B”(n=7,28%),n=8例(32%)通常被描述为“牙弓夹层”(n=6,24%)或“A型和B型”AAD(n=2,8%)。其余32%的患者接受了未提及足弓的诊断,报告n=6例(24%)为“A型”,n=2例(8%)为“B型”AAD。尽管用于描述NANBAAD的术语存在异质性,没有心脏填塞的病例,新发灌注不良或神经系统并发症的报告,在等待正确诊断时,没有突然死亡,也没有家庭出院和再次入院。
    结论:用于描述NANB主动脉夹层的术语的异质性突出表明需要提高意识,采用基于指南的分类系统,和进一步的教育,以更好地理解和正确地解决这个具有挑战性的实体,在模棱两可或疑难病例中尽量减少误诊。
    BACKGROUND: Non-A non-B (NANB) aortic dissections are uncommon and frequently unrecognized diseases. However, their proper identification is crucial given the unpredictable behavior of the dissected aorta with potential mortality and increased morbidity. We investigate the accuracy of radiological computed tomography angiography (CTA) reports in the diagnosis of acute NANB and the risk related to delayed recognition or misdiagnosis.
    METHODS: The pretreatment contrast CTA of all consecutive patients admitted with acute aortic dissection (AAD) in a University Hospital in London (UK) between January 2017 and May 2023 were reviewed to retrospectively verify the accuracy of CTA reports in the diagnosis of NANB AAD (B1-2D The risk related to the delayed diagnosis (morbidity, mortality, and hospital readmissions) were evaluated as secondary outcomes. The study was conducted according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines.
    RESULTS: Overall, 588 aortic CTAs were reviewed for a total of n = 393 (66.8%) type A AADs, n = 171 (29%) type B AADs and n = 25 (4.3%) NANB AADs (n = 16, 64% men, mean age 60.56, standard deviation ± 14.6 years). While no case of misdiagnosis was identified in Type A or B AAD groups, in NANBs only about a third of cases (n = 9, 36%) were immediately indicated as \"NANB\" (n = 2, 8%) or \"B with retrograde extension into the arch\" (n = 7, 28%), n = 8 cases (32%) were described generically as \"arch dissections\" (n = 6, 24%) or \"type A and B\" AAD (n = 2, 8%). The remaining 32% of patients received a diagnosis that did not include mention of the arch, as n = 6 (24%) cases were reported to be \"type A″ and n = 2 (8%) to be \"type B″ AADs. Despite the heterogeneity of terms used to describe NANB AAD, no case of cardiac tamponade, new onset malperfusion nor neurological complications were reported, and no sudden death nor home-discharge and readmission while waiting for the proper diagnosis.
    CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneity of terms used to describe NANB aortic dissection highlights the need for increased awareness, adoption of in guideline based classification systems, and further education to better understand and correctly address this challenging entity, minimizing misdiagnosis in ambiguous or difficult cases.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:牙周病是一种广泛流行的非传染性疾病,是全球十大致残原因之一。然而,人们对牙科诊断错误知之甚少。在这项工作中,通过回顾性部署基于电子健康记录(EHR)的触发工具,其次是黄金标准手册审查,我们通过一个牙周使用案例提供了牙科诊断错误分类率的流行病学估计.
    方法:基于EHR的触发工具(使用一系列触发(或线索)的回顾性记录审查工具,即,健康记录中的数据元素,以提醒审稿人潜在存在的错误诊断)被开发,在两个参与地点对EHR进行测试和运行,以标记所有可能误诊的病例。所有被标记为可能误诊的病例都由两名校准的领域专家进行了广泛的手动审查。还手动审查了未标记病例的子集。
    结果:共有2,262例患者图表符合研究的纳入标准。其中,该算法将1,124例病例标记为可能错误分类,将1,138例病例标记为可能正确诊断。当算法识别出一个案件可能被错误分类时,与黄金标准指定的诊断相比,kappa统计量为0.01。然而,对于标记为可能正确诊断的算法的情况,对黄金标准的审查显示kappa统计量为0.9,表明接近完美的一致性。观察到的诊断错误分类的比例为32%。临床或提供者特征没有显着差异。
    结论:我们的研究发现约有三分之一的牙周病例被错误分类。据报告,诊断错误比其他类型的错误更频繁地发生。并且更加可预防。基准诊断质量是第一步。随后的研究工作将深入了解导致牙科诊断错误的因素,并制定预防措施。
    结论:本研究揭示了卓越诊断在提供牙科护理中的重要性,并强调了技术在医疗点辅助诊断决策方面的潜在作用。
    BACKGROUND: Periodontal disease constitutes a widely prevalent category of non-communicable diseases and ranks among the top 10 causes of disability worldwide. Little however is known about diagnostic errors in dentistry. In this work, by retrospectively deploying an electronic health record (EHR)-based trigger tool, followed by gold standard manual review, we provide epidemiological estimates on the rate of diagnostic misclassification in dentistry through a periodontal use case.
    METHODS: An EHR-based trigger tool (a retrospective record review instrument that uses a list of triggers (or clues), i.e., data elements within the health record, to alert reviewers to the potential presence of a wrong diagnosis) was developed, tested and run against the EHR at the two participating sites to flag all cases having a potential misdiagnosis. All cases flagged as potentially misdiagnosed underwent extensive manual reviews by two calibrated domain experts. A subset of the non-flagged cases was also manually reviewed.
    RESULTS: A total of 2,262 patient charts met the study\'s inclusion criteria. Of these, the algorithm flagged 1,124 cases as potentially misclassified and 1,138 cases as potentially correctly diagnosed. When the algorithm identified a case as potentially misclassified, compared to the diagnosis assigned by the gold standard, the kappa statistic was 0.01. However, for cases the algorithm marked as potentially correctly diagnosed, the review against the gold standard showed a kappa statistic of 0.9, indicating near perfect agreement. The observed proportion of diagnostic misclassification was 32 %. There was no significant difference by clinic or provider characteristics.
    CONCLUSIONS: Our work revealed that about a third of periodontal cases are misclassified. Diagnostic errors have been reported to happen more frequently than other types of errors, and to be more preventable. Benchmarking diagnostic quality is a first step. Subsequent research endeavor will delve into comprehending the factors that contribute to diagnostic errors in dentistry and instituting measures to prevent them.
    CONCLUSIONS: This study sheds light on the significance of diagnostic excellence in the delivery of dental care, and highlights the potential role of technology in aiding diagnostic decision-making at the point of care.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:诊断差异是指诊断错误或获得卓越诊断机会的可预防差异。需要总结解决诊断差异的明确考虑因素的解决方案。我们旨在描述诊断差异的潜在解决方案,用说明性的例子将它们组织成面向行动的类型学,并描述这些解决方案的特征,以确定其进一步发展的差距。
    方法:在四个由不同专业知识组成的以人为中心的设计研讨会中,参与者构思并阐明了诊断差异的潜在解决方案,并得到了环境文献扫描输入的支持.与研讨会参与者进行的19个个人半结构化访谈验证了确定的解决方案示例和解决方案类型特征,细化类型学。
    结果:我们的类型学将21种各种类型的潜在诊断差异解决方案组织为实施所需的四个主要专业知识类别:医疗保健系统\'内部专业知识,教育者-,多学科患者安全研究人员-,和健康IT专业知识。我们提供了针对差异的潜在解决方案类型的描述,并将其与现有示例进行了比较。六种类型的特征是具有以诊断差异为重点的示例,五个是以诊断为重点的例子,和10只具有一般的医疗保健示例。只有三种解决方案类型得到了广泛的实施。十二个在有限范围内实施,6个大多是假设的。我们描述了差距,这些差距可告知每种建议的解决方案类型所需的进度,以专门解决诊断差异,并适合常规实践中的实施。
    结论:有许多机会来调整现有解决方案并促进其实施。可能的推动者包括新的观点,更多的证据,多学科合作,系统重新设计,有意义的病人参与,和面向行动的联盟。
    OBJECTIVE: Diagnostic disparities are preventable differences in diagnostic errors or opportunities to achieve diagnostic excellence. There is a need to summarize solutions with explicit considerations for addressing diagnostic disparities. We aimed to describe potential solutions to diagnostic disparities, organize them into an action-oriented typology with illustrative examples, and characterize these solutions to identify gaps for their further development.
    METHODS: During four human-centered design workshops composed of diverse expertise, participants ideated and clarified potential solutions to diagnostic disparities and were supported by environmental literature scan inputs. Nineteen individual semi-structured interviews with workshop participants validated identified solution examples and solution type characterizations, refining the typology.
    RESULTS: Our typology organizes 21 various types of potential diagnostic disparities solutions into four primary expertise categories needed for implementation: healthcare systems\' internal expertise, educator-, multidisciplinary patient safety researcher-, and health IT-expertise. We provide descriptions of potential solution types ideated as focused on disparities and compare those to existing examples. Six types were characterized as having diagnostic-disparity-focused examples, five as having diagnostic-focused examples, and 10 as only having general healthcare examples. Only three solution types had widespread implementation. Twelve had implementation on limited scope, and six were mostly hypothetical. We describe gaps that inform the progress needed for each of the suggested solution types to specifically address diagnostic disparities and be suitable for the implementation in routine practice.
    CONCLUSIONS: Numerous opportunities exist to tailor existing solutions and promote their implementation. Likely enablers include new perspectives, more evidence, multidisciplinary collaborations, system redesign, meaningful patient engagement, and action-oriented coalitions.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    诊断错误在重症监护实践中很普遍,并且与患者的伤害以及提供者和医疗保健系统的成本有关。患者复杂性,疾病严重程度,以及启动适当治疗的紧迫性都会导致决策错误。临床医生相关因素,如疲劳,认知过载,缺乏经验进一步干扰有效决策。认知科学提供了对临床决策过程的见解,可用于减少错误。这项基于证据的审查讨论了有关重症监护决策的十个常见误解。通过了解从业者如何做出临床决策并检查错误是如何发生的,可以制定和实施策略以减少决策错误并改善患者预后。
    Diagnostic errors are prevalent in critical care practice and are associated with patient harm and costs for providers and the healthcare system. Patient complexity, illness severity, and the urgency in initiating proper treatment all contribute to decision-making errors. Clinician-related factors such as fatigue, cognitive overload, and inexperience further interfere with effective decision-making. Cognitive science has provided insight into the clinical decision-making process that can be used to reduce error. This evidence-based review discusses ten common misconceptions regarding critical care decision-making. By understanding how practitioners make clinical decisions and examining how errors occur, strategies may be developed and implemented to decrease errors in Decision-making and improve patient outcomes.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:贫血是一种复杂的疾病,具有不同的原因,并且在实验室检测领域不断扩大的背景下提出了诊断挑战。贫血诊断管理团队(DMT)的实施可以帮助医疗保健提供者应对这种复杂性。
    方法:这项准实验研究评估了贫血DMT对初级保健提供者为贫血患者订购实验室检查的影响。这项研究包括成人患者(≥18岁)贫血(血红蛋白<12.0g/dL的非妊娠妇女,男性的血红蛋白<13.0g/dL)提交给家庭医学诊所。将DMT审查的病例(n=100)与对照组(n=95)进行比较。
    结果:DMT建议对76例患者进行额外检测。与对照组相比,DMT组接受随访测试的患者明显更多(59%vs34%;P<.001)。此外,DMT组每位患者接受的平均检查次数较高(1.70±2.2vs0.95±1.9;P=.01).
    结论:实施贫血DMT影响贫血患者的随访检测模式,有可能增强诊断彻底性和患者护理。
    BACKGROUND: Anemia is a complex condition with diverse causes and poses diagnostic challenges amid the expanding landscape of laboratory testing. Implementation of an anemia diagnostic management team (DMT) can aid health care providers in navigating this complexity.
    METHODS: This quasi-experimental study assessed the impact of an anemia DMT on laboratory test ordering by primary care providers for anemic patients. This study included adult patients (≥18 years) with anemia (hemoglobin <12.0 g/dL for nonpregnant women, hemoglobin <13.0 g/dL for men) presenting to a family medicine clinic. Cases reviewed by the DMT (n = 100) were compared with a control group (n = 95).
    RESULTS: The DMT recommended additional testing for 76 patients. Significantly more patients in the DMT group underwent follow-up tests compared with controls (59% vs 34%; P < .001). Moreover, the DMT group underwent a higher mean number of tests per patient (1.70 ± 2.2 vs 0.95 ± 1.9; P = .01).
    CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an anemia DMT influenced follow-up testing patterns in anemic patients, potentially enhancing diagnostic thoroughness and patient care.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:实践中的医学诊断通过连续的反馈循环与研究联系在一起:对确诊病例的研究塑造了我们对疾病的理解,塑造未来的诊断实践。不考虑不完善和复杂的诊断过程,在该过程中,某些病例更有可能被正确诊断(或完全诊断),反馈回路可能无意中加剧未来的诊断错误和偏见。
    方法:如果关于疾病病因的误导性证据鼓励自我延续的系统性错误,则会发生反馈回路失败,影响未来的诊断和病人护理。本文定义了医疗诊断中反馈回路故障的场景。
    方法:通过模拟案例,我们描述了疾病的发病率,介绍,当观察数据被总结为诊断错误引起的偏见时,风险因素可能会被误解。第四模拟扩展到进行性疾病。
    结果:当严重的疾病更容易被诊断时,不太严重的病例无法诊断,越来越导致对疾病表现的患病率和异质性的低估。观察到的人口统计学群体之间的发病率和症状差异可能是由风险差异驱动的。介绍,诊断过程本身,或者这些的组合。我们提出了对风险因素和代表性的看法如何驱动诊断的可能性。患者组之间不同的诊断率可以反馈越来越大的诊断错误和诊断和治疗时机的差异。
    结论:过去的数据和未来的医疗实践之间的反馈循环似乎是有益的。然而,在看似合理的情况下,执行不当的反馈回路会降低护理水平。基于诊断个体的观察数据的直接总结可能会产生误导,特别是那些影响诊断过程本身的症状和危险因素。
    结论:关于疾病的现有证据可以(并且应该)影响诊断过程。如果有偏见的“证据”鼓励诊断错误,则可能会发生反馈回路故障,导致未来证据库的错误。当轻度病例与重度病例或人口统计组之间的诊断准确性有所不同时,关于疾病患病率和表现的错误结论将导致没有特别考虑这种变异性。在诊断过程中使用人口统计特征应谨慎合理,特别是避免潜在的认知偏见和过度矫正。
    BACKGROUND: Medical diagnosis in practice connects to research through continuous feedback loops: Studies of diagnosed cases shape our understanding of disease, which shapes future diagnostic practice. Without accounting for an imperfect and complex diagnostic process in which some cases are more likely to be diagnosed correctly (or diagnosed at all), the feedback loop can inadvertently exacerbate future diagnostic errors and biases.
    METHODS: A feedback loop failure occurs if misleading evidence about disease etiology encourages systematic errors that self-perpetuate, compromising future diagnoses and patient care. This article defines scenarios for feedback loop failure in medical diagnosis.
    METHODS: Through simulated cases, we characterize how disease incidence, presentation, and risk factors can be misunderstood when observational data are summarized naive to biases arising from diagnostic error. A fourth simulation extends to a progressive disease.
    RESULTS: When severe cases of a disease are diagnosed more readily, less severe cases go undiagnosed, increasingly leading to underestimation of the prevalence and heterogeneity of the disease presentation. Observed differences in incidence and symptoms between demographic groups may be driven by differences in risk, presentation, the diagnostic process itself, or a combination of these. We suggested how perceptions about risk factors and representativeness may drive the likelihood of diagnosis. Differing diagnosis rates between patient groups can feed back to increasingly greater diagnostic errors and disparities in the timing of diagnosis and treatment.
    CONCLUSIONS: A feedback loop between past data and future medical practice may seem obviously beneficial. However, under plausible scenarios, poorly implemented feedback loops can degrade care. Direct summaries from observational data based on diagnosed individuals may be misleading, especially concerning those symptoms and risk factors that influence the diagnostic process itself.
    CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence about a disease can (and should) influence the diagnostic process. A feedback loop failure may occur if biased \"evidence\" encourages diagnostic errors, leading to future errors in the evidence base.When diagnostic accuracy varies for mild versus severe cases or between demographic groups, incorrect conclusions about disease prevalence and presentation will result without specifically accounting for such variability.Use of demographic characteristics in the diagnostic process should be done with careful justification, in particular avoiding potential cognitive biases and overcorrection.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:诊断错误是临床实践中可预防伤害的主要原因。需要可实施的工具来量化和瞄准这个问题。为了解决这个差距,我们旨在通过开发诊断错误的症状-疾病对分析(SPADE)框架的可计算表型来推广该框架,然后演示该模式如何应用于多种临床环境.
    方法:我们为SPADE流程创建了一个信息模型,然后将来自电子健康记录(EHR)的数据字段和使用中的索赔数据映射到该模型,以创建SPADE信息模型(意图)和SPADE可计算表型(扩展)。后来,我们验证了可计算表型,并在三个不同卫生系统的四个案例研究中对其进行了测试,以证明其实用性。
    结果:我们使用四个不同的案例研究在三个不同的位点定位并测试了SPADE可计算表型。我们表明,用于计算SPADE基本度量的数据字段在EHR数据仓库中完全可用,可用于提取,并且可以从提供商和/或保险公司的角度实施SPADE框架,它们可以在许多卫生系统上实施,以便将来监测误诊相关危害。
    结论:SPADE基本措施的数据在EHR和行政索赔中很容易获得。数据提取的方法具有潜在的普遍适用性,并且提取的数据可以在网络系统中方便地获得。需要进一步的研究来验证具有不同数据基础设施的不同设置的可计算表型。
    OBJECTIVE: Diagnostic errors are the leading cause of preventable harm in clinical practice. Implementable tools to quantify and target this problem are needed. To address this gap, we aimed to generalize the Symptom-Disease Pair Analysis of Diagnostic Error (SPADE) framework by developing its computable phenotype and then demonstrated how that schema could be applied in multiple clinical contexts.
    METHODS: We created an information model for the SPADE processes, then mapped data fields from electronic health records (EHR) and claims data in use to that model to create the SPADE information model (intention) and the SPADE computable phenotype (extension). Later we validated the computable phenotype and tested it in four case studies in three different health systems to demonstrate its utility.
    RESULTS: We mapped and tested the SPADE computable phenotype in three different sites using four different case studies. We showed that data fields to compute an SPADE base measure are fully available in the EHR Data Warehouse for extraction and can operationalize the SPADE framework from provider and/or insurer perspective, and they could be implemented on numerous health systems for future work in monitor misdiagnosis-related harms.
    CONCLUSIONS: Data for the SPADE base measure is readily available in EHR and administrative claims. The method of data extraction is potentially universally applicable, and the data extracted is conveniently available within a network system. Further study is needed to validate the computable phenotype across different settings with different data infrastructures.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号