Olga Kostopoulou

Diagnostic difficulty and error in primary care—a systematic review

BACKGROUND Diagnostic error in primary care can have serious implications for the patient, the clinician and the health-care system, possibly more so than other types of error. OBJECTIVE To identify common characteristics of diseases that GPs may misdiagnose. METHODS Systematic search of the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for primary research on diagnostic error/delay in primary care. Papers on system errors, patient delay, case reports, reviews, opinion pieces, studies not based on actual cases and studies not using a systematic sample were excluded from the review. Twenty-one papers were included. All papers were assessed for quality using the GRADE system. Common features were identified across diseases and presentations that made diagnosis difficult and led to error/delay. RESULTS Most studies were retrospective cohorts of patients recruited in hospital and collected data from patient interviews and/or hospital records, resulting in incomplete and potentially biased information. It was usually not possible to determine preventability of the delay. Some conditions were extremely rare, suggesting a specialist research interest rather than an increased rate of misdiagnosis. Conditions investigated were malignancies, myocardial infarction, meningitis, dementia, iron deficiency anaemia, asthma, tremor in the elderly and HIV. Common features of difficulty were atypical presentations, non-specific presentations, very low prevalence, the presence of co-morbidity and perceptual features and could be missed. CONCLUSIONS Misdiagnosis in primary care covers a wide range of conditions that may be related in the manner in which they present. The challenge is to identify ways of supporting the diagnostic process in potentially difficult presentations.

Predictors of diagnostic accuracy and safe management in difficult diagnostic problems in family medicine.

Objective. To investigate the role of information gathering and clinical experience on the diagnosis and management of difficult diagnostic problems in family medicine. Method. Seven diagnostic scenarios including 1 to 4 predetermined features of difficulty were constructed and presented on a computer to 84 physicians: 21 residents in family medicine, 21 family physicians with 1 to 3 y in practice, and 42 family physicians with ≥10 y in practice. Following the Active Information Search process tracing approach, participants were initially presented with a patient description and presenting complaint and were subsequently able to request further information to diagnose and manage the patient. Evidence-based scoring criteria for information gathering, diagnosis, and management were derived from the literature and a separate study of expert opinion. Results. Rates of misdiagnosis were in accordance with the number of features of difficulty. Seventy-eight percent of incorrect diagnoses were followed by inappropriate management and 92% of correct diagnoses by appropriate management. Number of critical cues requested (cues diagnostic of any relevant differential diagnoses in a scenario) was a significant predictor of accuracy in 6 scenarios: 1 additional critical cue increased the odds of obtaining the correct diagnosis by between 1.3 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0—1.8) and 7.5 (95% CI, 3.2— 17.7), depending on the scenario. No effect of experience was detected on either diagnostic accuracy or management. Residents requested significantly more cues than experienced family physicians did. Conclusions. Supporting the gathering of critical information has the potential to improve the diagnosis and management of difficult problems in family medicine.

Confidential reporting of patient safety events in primary care: results from a multilevel classification of cognitive and system factors

Objective: To classify events of actual or potential harm to primary care patients using a multilevel taxonomy of cognitive and system factors. Methods: Observational study of patient safety events obtained via a confidential but not anonymous reporting system. Reports were followed up with interviews where necessary. Events were analysed for their causes and contributing factors using causal trees and were classified using the taxonomy. Five general medical practices in the West Midlands were selected to represent a range of sizes and types of patient population. All practice staff were invited to report patient safety events. Main outcome measures were frequencies of clinical types of events reported, cognitive types of error, types of detection and contributing factors; and relationship between types of error, practice size, patient consequences and detection. Results: 78 reports were relevant to patient safety and analysable. They included 21 (27%) adverse events and 50 (64%) near misses. 16.7% (13/71) had serious patient consequences, including one death. 75.7% (59/78) had the potential for serious patient harm. Most reports referred to administrative errors (25.6%, 20/78). 60% (47/78) of the reports contained sufficient information to characterise cognition: “situation assessment and response selection” was involved in 45% (21/47) of these reports and was often linked to serious potential consequences. The most frequent contributing factor was work organisation, identified in 71 events. This included excessive task demands (47%, 37/71) and fragmentation (28%, 22/71). Conclusions: Even though most reported events were near misses, events with serious patient consequences were also reported. Failures in situation assessment and response selection, a cognitive activity that occurs in both clinical and administrative tasks, was related to serious potential harm.

Clinical Intuition in Family Medicine: More Than First Impressions

PURPOSE The clinical literature advises physicians not to trust their intuition. Studies of clinical intuition, however, equate it to early impressions, the first thing that comes to the physician’s mind. This study aimed to investigate the validity of this perspective by examining real cases of intuition in family medicine. METHODS Eighteen family physicians were interviewed about patient cases in which they believed that they had experienced an intuition. Cases were included if (1) participants were unaware of the basis of their judgment, or (2) participants talked about the basis of their judgment but believed that it was irrational or unsubstantiated. During the interview, case descriptions were systematically probed following the Critical Decision Method. Transcripts were coded for judgments, informational cues, expectancies, goals, and actions and were reordered into chronological accounts of the decision process. The 2 authors independently categorized cases into 3 emerging decision process types. RESULTS Participants reported 31 cases, 24 of which met inclusion criteria. Three types of decision process emerged: gut feelings, recognitions, and insights (κ = 0.78). In all cases, participants thought that their intuitive judgment was in conflict with a more rational explanation or what other colleagues would do. CONCLUSIONS Automatic, nonanalytical processes in clinical judgment extend beyond first impressions. Rather than admonishing clinicians not to trust their intuition, it should be acknowledged that little is currently known about the different types of intuitive processes and what determines their success or failure. Research on the conditions for accurate clinical intuitions is needed.

Translational Medicine and Patient Safety in Europe: TRANSFoRm—Architecture for the Learning Health System in Europe

The Learning Health System (LHS) describes linking routine healthcare systems directly with both research translation and knowledge translation as an extension of the evidence-based medicine paradigm, taking advantage of the ubiquitous use of electronic health record (EHR) systems. TRANSFoRm is an EU FP7 project that seeks to develop an infrastructure for the LHS in European primary care. Methods. The project is based on three clinical use cases, a genotype-phenotype study in diabetes, a randomised controlled trial with gastroesophageal reflux disease, and a diagnostic decision support system for chest pain, abdominal pain, and shortness of breath. Results. Four models were developed (clinical research, clinical data, provenance, and diagnosis) that form the basis of the projects approach to interoperability. These models are maintained as ontologies with binding of terms to define precise data elements. CDISC ODM and SDM standards are extended using an archetype approach to enable a two-level model of individual data elements, representing both research content and clinical content. Separate configurations of the TRANSFoRm tools serve each use case. Conclusions. The project has been successful in using ontologies and archetypes to develop a highly flexible solution to the problem of heterogeneity of data sources presented by the LHS.

Sources of variability in uncertain medical decisions in the ICU: a process tracing study

Background: Consistency of medical decision making (equity) is an important component of quality of care. When patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) present with an exacerbation needing respiratory support they may die if it is not provided. However, if the disease has reached its terminal stage, ventilation will prolong the process of dying. The ventilation outcome is uncertain and there is evidence of variability when this decision is made, the sources of which are not well understood. Objectives: To identify sources of variability and propose ways of tackling them in order to promote equity in this type of medical decision. Methods: Six case histories were selected from hospital records of COPD patients. Fourteen senior doctors from seven hospitals in the West Midlands participated. A process tracing approach was used which consisted of (1) withholding case information until specifically requested by the doctors, (2) estimating survival during the decision making process, and (3) concurrent questioning regarding information interpretation and its impact on survival estimates and decisions. Results: The observed decision variability was attributed to doctors attaching importance to different information, gathering different information, and interpreting information differently. There were significant differences between doctors in the amount of information requested. Conclusions: Differences in information gathering and interpretation by clinicians can result in different decisions being made about the same patient. This variation may exist for other uncertain medical decisions and may be tackled by providing clinicians with prognostic models in the form of usable decision aids.

Making decisions about benefits and harms of medicines

Even when good scientific data are available, peoples interpretation of risks and benefits will differ

Information Distortion in Physicians’ Diagnostic Judgments

Background: Information distortion suggests that people change the evaluation of new information to support an emerging belief. The present study was designed to measure the extent to which physicians distort incoming medical information to support an emerging diagnosis. Design: Data were collected via an anonymous questionnaire. The experimental group (102 physicians) read 3 patient scenarios, each with 2 competing diagnoses. Physicians first read information that favored 1 of the 2 diagnoses (the “steer”). They then rated a series of neutral cues that favored neither diagnosis. At each cue presentation, respondents rated the extent to which cues favored either diagnosis and updated the strength of their diagnostic belief. After the neutral cues in the third scenario, respondents rated cues that opposed the initial steer. A control group (36 physicians) rated all the cues in random order and not within scenarios, thus providing unbiased baseline ratings for calculating distortion in the experimental group. Results: Distortion was statistically significant (P < 0.001) and was associated with the strength of belief in the leading diagnosis. Physicians with over 10 years in practice distorted less than their less experienced counterparts ( X ¯ = 1.04 v. X ¯ = 1.78, P < 0.05). Having developed an initial diagnostic leaning consistent with the steer, 56% of physicians remained committed to it after receiving the conflicting cues. Distortion was strongly associated with commitment to the steer (odds ratio, 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.03–1.79; P = 0.03). Limitations: Physicians did not elicit information; therefore, the authors cannot estimate the size of distortion in tasks involving information search. Conclusions: Distortion could partly explain commitment of physicians to an early diagnosis. Both distortion and strength of initial diagnostic belief seem to decline after 10 years in family medicine.

From cognition to the system: developing a multilevel taxonomy of patient safety in general practice.

The paper describes the process of developing a taxonomy of patient safety in general practice. The methodologies employed included fieldwork, task analysis and confidential reporting of patient-safety events in five West Midlands practices. Reported events were traced back to their root causes and contributing factors. The resulting taxonomy is based on a theoretical model of human cognition, includes multiple levels of classification to reflect the chain of causation and considers affective and physiological influences on performance. Events are classified at three levels. At level one, the information-processing model of cognition is used to classify errors. At level two, immediate causes are identified, internal and external to the individual. At level three, more remote causal factors are classified as either ‘work organization’ or ‘technical’ with subcategories. The properties of the taxonomy (validity, reliability, comprehensiveness) as well as its usability and acceptability remain to be tested with potential users.

Reducing diagnostic errors in primary care. A systematic meta-review of computerized diagnostic decision support systems by the LINNEAUS collaboration on patient safety in primary care

ABSTRACT Background: Computerized diagnostic decision support systems (CDDSS) have the potential to support the cognitive task of diagnosis, which is one of the areas where general practitioners have greatest difficulty and which accounts for a significant proportion of adverse events recorded in the primary care setting. Objective: To determine the extent to which CDDSS may meet the requirements of supporting the cognitive task of diagnosis, and the currently perceived barriers that prevent the integration of CDDSS with electronic health record (EHR) systems. Methods: We conducted a meta-review of existing systematic reviews published in English, searching MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and Web of Knowledge for articles on the features and effectiveness of CDDSS for medical diagnosis published since 2004. Eligibility criteria included systematic reviews where individual clinicians were primary end users. Outcomes we were interested in were the effectiveness and identification of specific features of CDDSS on diagnostic performance. Results: We identified 1970 studies and excluded 1938 because they did not fit our inclusion criteria. A total of 45 articles were identified and 12 were found suitable for meta-review. Extraction of high-level requirements identified that a more standardized computable approach is needed to knowledge representation, one that can be readily updated as new knowledge is gained. In addition, a deep integration with the EHR is needed in order to trigger at appropriate points in cognitive workflow. Conclusion: Developing a CDDSS that is able to utilize dynamic vocabulary tools to quickly capture and code relevant diagnostic findings, and coupling these with individualized diagnostic suggestions based on the best-available evidence has the potential to improve diagnostic accuracy, but requires evaluation.