The incidence of diagnostic errors in UK primary care and implications for health care, research, and medical education: a retrospective record analysis of missed diagnostic opportunities

Author:

Cheraghi-Sohi Sudeh,Holland Fiona,Reeves David,Campbell Stephen,Esmail Aneez,Morris Rebecca,Small Nicola,de Wet Carl,Singh Hardeep,

Abstract

BackgroundDiagnostic errors have recently been identified as a high-priority patient safety problem in primary care by the World Health Organization (WHO). However, no studies exist in UK to quantify the extent of such errors and associated harm in primary care.AimThis study aimed to determine the incidence of ‘missed diagnostic opportunities’ (MDOs) in UK primary care.MethodRetrospective reviews of electronic health records (EHRs). Twenty-one general practices were recruited, sampled by size and deprivation. Pairs of GP-reviewers independently reviewed 100 randomly selected face-to-face consultations with adults in each practice (n = 21), reviewing a 12-month period for consultations containing new diagnostic activity. Records were jointly reviewed where at least one reviewer identified an MDO to gain consensus.ResultsWe reviewed 2070 EHRs; and, 1530 contained some new diagnostic activity. After joint review, at least one clinician thought an MDO was likely/certain in 4.4% (95% CI = 3.2 to 5.8) of these consultations, and both rated an MDO likely/certain in 2.5% (95% CI = 1.6 to 3.9). Final consensus, identified MDO occurrences for 61.4% of the consultations. The overall agreement was higher than other comparable studies (κ statistic 0.68), and 54% (n = 20) of the mutually agreed MDOs (n = 56), were rated as likely to cause moderate or severe patient harm.ConclusionIn this first assessment of MDOs in UK primary care, we found their frequency to be relatively low but human cost relatively high for over half of those experiencing an error. Identifying workable strategies to prevent errors occurring from the identified contributing factors, and prioritising diagnostic errors is the next critical action.

Publisher

Royal College of General Practitioners

Subject

Family Practice

Cited by 8 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3