Dataset Information

Clinical criteria to screen for inpatient diagnostic errors: a scoping review.

ABSTRACT: Diagnostic errors are common and costly, but difficult to detect. "Trigger" tools have promise to facilitate detection, but have not been applied specifically for inpatient diagnostic error. We performed a scoping review to collate all individual "trigger" criteria that have been developed or validated that may indicate that an inpatient diagnostic error has occurred. We searched three databases and screened 8568 titles and abstracts to ultimately include 33 articles. We also developed a conceptual framework of diagnostic error outcomes using real clinical scenarios, and used it to categorize the extracted criteria. Of the multiple criteria we found related to inpatient diagnostic error and amenable to automated detection, the most common were death, transfer to a higher level of care, arrest or "code", and prolonged length of hospital stay. Several others, such as abrupt stoppage of multiple medications or change in procedure, may also be useful. Validation for general adverse event detection was done in 15 studies, but only one performed validation for diagnostic error specifically. Automated detection was used in only two studies. These criteria may be useful for developing diagnostic error detection tools.

SUBMITTER: Shenvi EC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4474234 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinical criteria to screen for inpatient diagnostic errors: a scoping review.

Shenvi Edna C EC El-Kareh Robert R

Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany) 20150201 1

Diagnostic errors are common and costly, but difficult to detect. "Trigger" tools have promise to facilitate detection, but have not been applied specifically for inpatient diagnostic error. We performed a scoping review to collate all individual "trigger" criteria that have been developed or validated that may indicate that an inpatient diagnostic error has occurred. We searched three databases and screened 8568 titles and abstracts to ultimately include 33 articles. We also developed a concept ...[more]

PMID: 26097801

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionNumerous studies have been performed assessing optimal treatment regimens for evacuating (retained) products of conception from the uterus, but standardized criteria for diagnosing retained products of conception (RPOC) are still lacking. We aim to provide an overview of diagnostic criteria in current literature, used to diagnose RPOC after induced first-trimester abortion or early pregnancy loss.Material and methodsPubmed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library were searched systematically up until March 2020 for English articles reporting on induced abortion or early pregnancy loss. Articles not specifying diagnostic criteria used to assess completeness of treatment were excluded, as were conference abstracts, expert opinions, reviews, and case reports. Four elements of diagnostic criteria were described: diagnostic tools, parameters used within these tools, applied cut-off values, and timing of follow up. Additionally, a meta-analysis was performed assessing diagnostic qualities of the most often applied diagnostic tool and parameter.ResultsThe search strategy yielded 1233 unique articles, of which 248 were included, with a total of 339 517 participants. In the 79 included randomized controlled trials, six diagnostic tools to assess RPOC were identified, combined in 14 ways, with 55 different cut-off values. In 169 observational studies, seven diagnostic tools were identified, used in 28 combinations, applying 89 different cut-off values. Transvaginal ultrasonographic measurement of endometrial thickness with a cut-off value of at least 15 mm indicating RPOC, was used most frequently. In the timing of follow-up there was great variation, with 55 and 107 different combinations in randomized controlled trials and observational studies, respectively. Assessment of treatment success was scheduled most often around 2 weeks after treatment. Diagnostic qualities of endometrial thickness of 15 mm or more was not adequately assessed.ConclusionsThere is wide variation in the way RPOC are assessed, and the criteria used to define RPOC following induced abortion and early pregnancy loss; ultrasonographic measurement of endometrial thickness, with a cut-off of 15 mm or more 2 weeks after primary treatment is the most widely used diagnostic approach. A meta-analysis on diagnostic accuracy of endometrial thickness of 15 mm or more did not lead to solid results. These findings can be a first step to develop a workable standard of establishing RPOC after induced abortion or early pregnancy loss.

Project description:Objectives(1) Systematically assemble, analyse and synthesise published evidence on causes of prescribing error in children. (2) Present results to a multidisciplinary group of paediatric prescribing stakeholders to validate findings and establish how causative factors lead to errors in practice.DesignScoping review using Arksey and O'Malley's framework, including stakeholder consultation; qualitative evidence synthesis.MethodsWe followed the six scoping review stages. (1) Research question-the research question was 'What is known about causes of prescribing error in children?' (2) Search strategy-we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL (from inception to February 2018), grey literature and reference lists of included studies. (3) Article selection-all published evidence contributing information on the causes of prescribing error in children was eligible for inclusion. We included review articles as secondary evidence to broaden understanding. (4) Charting data-results were collated in a custom data charting form. (5) Reporting results-we summarised article characteristics, extracted causal evidence and thematically synthesised findings. (6) Stakeholder consultation-results were presented to a multidisciplinary focus group of six prescribing stakeholders to establish validity, relevance and mechanisms by which causes lead to errors in practice.Results68 articles were included. We identified six main causes of prescribing errors: children's fundamental differences led to individualised dosing and calculations; off-licence prescribing; medication formulations; communication with children; and experience working with children. Primary evidence clarifying causes was lacking.ConclusionsSpecific factors complicate prescribing for children and increase risk of errors. Primary research is needed to confirm and elaborate these causes of error. In the meantime, this review uses existing evidence to make provisional paediatric-specific recommendations for policy, practice and education.

Dataset Information

Clinical criteria to screen for inpatient diagnostic errors: a scoping review.

Publications

Clinical criteria to screen for inpatient diagnostic errors: a scoping review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets