Finding Diagnostic Errors in Children Admitted to the PICU

Maria Caridad Davalos, Kenya Lavon Samuels, Ashley N.D. Meyer, Satid Thammasitboon, Moushumi Sur, Kevin Roy, Aymer Al-Mutairi, Hardeep Singh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: To determine whether the Safer Dx Instrument, a structured tool for finding diagnostic errors in primary care, can be used to reliably detect diagnostic errors in patients admitted to a PICU. Design and Setting: The Safer Dx Instrument consists of 11 questions to evaluate the diagnostic process and a final question to determine if diagnostic error occurred. We used the instrument to analyze four "high-risk" patient cohorts admitted to the PICU between June 2013 and December 2013. Patients: High-risk cohorts were defined as cohort 1: patients who were autopsied; cohort 2: patients seen as outpatients within 2 weeks prior to PICU admission; cohort 3: patients transferred to PICU unexpectedly from an acute care floor after a rapid response and requiring vasoactive medications and/or endotracheal intubation due to decompensation within 24 hours; and cohort 4: patients transferred to PICU unexpectedly from an acute care floor after a rapid response without subsequent decompensation in 24 hours. Interventions: Two clinicians used the instrument to independently review records in each cohort for diagnostic errors, defined as missed opportunities to make a correct or timely diagnosis. Errors were confirmed by senior expert clinicians. Measurements and Main Results: Diagnostic errors were present in 26 of 214 high-risk patient records (12.1%; 95% CI, 8.2-17.5%) with the following frequency distribution: cohort 1: two of 16 (12.5%); cohort 2: one of 41 (2.4%); cohort 3: 13 of 44 (29.5%); and cohort 4: 10 of 113 (8.8%). Overall initial reviewer agreement was 93.6% (κ, 0.72). Infections and neurologic conditions were the most commonly missed diagnoses across all high-risk cohorts (16/26). Conclusions: The Safer Dx Instrument has high reliability and validity for diagnostic error detection when used in high-risk pediatric care settings. With further validation in additional clinical settings, it could be useful to enhance learning and feedback about diagnostic safety in children.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)265-271
Number of pages7
JournalPediatric Critical Care Medicine
Volume18
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Mar 2017

Fingerprint

Diagnostic Errors
Intratracheal Intubation
Reproducibility of Results
Nervous System
Primary Health Care
Outpatients
Pediatrics
Safety
Infection

Keywords

  • critical care
  • diagnostic error
  • measurement
  • patient safety
  • quality improvement

Cite this

Davalos, M. C., Samuels, K. L., Meyer, A. N. D., Thammasitboon, S., Sur, M., Roy, K., ... Singh, H. (2017). Finding Diagnostic Errors in Children Admitted to the PICU. Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, 18(3), 265-271. https://doi.org/10.1097/PCC.0000000000001059
Davalos, Maria Caridad ; Samuels, Kenya Lavon ; Meyer, Ashley N.D. ; Thammasitboon, Satid ; Sur, Moushumi ; Roy, Kevin ; Al-Mutairi, Aymer ; Singh, Hardeep. / Finding Diagnostic Errors in Children Admitted to the PICU. In: Pediatric Critical Care Medicine. 2017 ; Vol. 18, No. 3. pp. 265-271.
@article{36d84f9c9de148ebbfe2f415064f3fc9,
title = "Finding Diagnostic Errors in Children Admitted to the PICU",
abstract = "Objectives: To determine whether the Safer Dx Instrument, a structured tool for finding diagnostic errors in primary care, can be used to reliably detect diagnostic errors in patients admitted to a PICU. Design and Setting: The Safer Dx Instrument consists of 11 questions to evaluate the diagnostic process and a final question to determine if diagnostic error occurred. We used the instrument to analyze four {"}high-risk{"} patient cohorts admitted to the PICU between June 2013 and December 2013. Patients: High-risk cohorts were defined as cohort 1: patients who were autopsied; cohort 2: patients seen as outpatients within 2 weeks prior to PICU admission; cohort 3: patients transferred to PICU unexpectedly from an acute care floor after a rapid response and requiring vasoactive medications and/or endotracheal intubation due to decompensation within 24 hours; and cohort 4: patients transferred to PICU unexpectedly from an acute care floor after a rapid response without subsequent decompensation in 24 hours. Interventions: Two clinicians used the instrument to independently review records in each cohort for diagnostic errors, defined as missed opportunities to make a correct or timely diagnosis. Errors were confirmed by senior expert clinicians. Measurements and Main Results: Diagnostic errors were present in 26 of 214 high-risk patient records (12.1{\%}; 95{\%} CI, 8.2-17.5{\%}) with the following frequency distribution: cohort 1: two of 16 (12.5{\%}); cohort 2: one of 41 (2.4{\%}); cohort 3: 13 of 44 (29.5{\%}); and cohort 4: 10 of 113 (8.8{\%}). Overall initial reviewer agreement was 93.6{\%} (κ, 0.72). Infections and neurologic conditions were the most commonly missed diagnoses across all high-risk cohorts (16/26). Conclusions: The Safer Dx Instrument has high reliability and validity for diagnostic error detection when used in high-risk pediatric care settings. With further validation in additional clinical settings, it could be useful to enhance learning and feedback about diagnostic safety in children.",
keywords = "critical care, diagnostic error, measurement, patient safety, quality improvement",
author = "Davalos, {Maria Caridad} and Samuels, {Kenya Lavon} and Meyer, {Ashley N.D.} and Satid Thammasitboon and Moushumi Sur and Kevin Roy and Aymer Al-Mutairi and Hardeep Singh",
year = "2017",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/PCC.0000000000001059",
language = "English",
volume = "18",
pages = "265--271",
journal = "Pediatric Critical Care Medicine",
issn = "1529-7535",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins Ltd.",
number = "3",

}

Davalos, MC, Samuels, KL, Meyer, AND, Thammasitboon, S, Sur, M, Roy, K, Al-Mutairi, A & Singh, H 2017, 'Finding Diagnostic Errors in Children Admitted to the PICU', Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 265-271. https://doi.org/10.1097/PCC.0000000000001059

Finding Diagnostic Errors in Children Admitted to the PICU. / Davalos, Maria Caridad; Samuels, Kenya Lavon; Meyer, Ashley N.D.; Thammasitboon, Satid; Sur, Moushumi; Roy, Kevin; Al-Mutairi, Aymer; Singh, Hardeep.

In: Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, Vol. 18, No. 3, 01.03.2017, p. 265-271.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Finding Diagnostic Errors in Children Admitted to the PICU

AU - Davalos, Maria Caridad

AU - Samuels, Kenya Lavon

AU - Meyer, Ashley N.D.

AU - Thammasitboon, Satid

AU - Sur, Moushumi

AU - Roy, Kevin

AU - Al-Mutairi, Aymer

AU - Singh, Hardeep

PY - 2017/3/1

Y1 - 2017/3/1

N2 - Objectives: To determine whether the Safer Dx Instrument, a structured tool for finding diagnostic errors in primary care, can be used to reliably detect diagnostic errors in patients admitted to a PICU. Design and Setting: The Safer Dx Instrument consists of 11 questions to evaluate the diagnostic process and a final question to determine if diagnostic error occurred. We used the instrument to analyze four "high-risk" patient cohorts admitted to the PICU between June 2013 and December 2013. Patients: High-risk cohorts were defined as cohort 1: patients who were autopsied; cohort 2: patients seen as outpatients within 2 weeks prior to PICU admission; cohort 3: patients transferred to PICU unexpectedly from an acute care floor after a rapid response and requiring vasoactive medications and/or endotracheal intubation due to decompensation within 24 hours; and cohort 4: patients transferred to PICU unexpectedly from an acute care floor after a rapid response without subsequent decompensation in 24 hours. Interventions: Two clinicians used the instrument to independently review records in each cohort for diagnostic errors, defined as missed opportunities to make a correct or timely diagnosis. Errors were confirmed by senior expert clinicians. Measurements and Main Results: Diagnostic errors were present in 26 of 214 high-risk patient records (12.1%; 95% CI, 8.2-17.5%) with the following frequency distribution: cohort 1: two of 16 (12.5%); cohort 2: one of 41 (2.4%); cohort 3: 13 of 44 (29.5%); and cohort 4: 10 of 113 (8.8%). Overall initial reviewer agreement was 93.6% (κ, 0.72). Infections and neurologic conditions were the most commonly missed diagnoses across all high-risk cohorts (16/26). Conclusions: The Safer Dx Instrument has high reliability and validity for diagnostic error detection when used in high-risk pediatric care settings. With further validation in additional clinical settings, it could be useful to enhance learning and feedback about diagnostic safety in children.

AB - Objectives: To determine whether the Safer Dx Instrument, a structured tool for finding diagnostic errors in primary care, can be used to reliably detect diagnostic errors in patients admitted to a PICU. Design and Setting: The Safer Dx Instrument consists of 11 questions to evaluate the diagnostic process and a final question to determine if diagnostic error occurred. We used the instrument to analyze four "high-risk" patient cohorts admitted to the PICU between June 2013 and December 2013. Patients: High-risk cohorts were defined as cohort 1: patients who were autopsied; cohort 2: patients seen as outpatients within 2 weeks prior to PICU admission; cohort 3: patients transferred to PICU unexpectedly from an acute care floor after a rapid response and requiring vasoactive medications and/or endotracheal intubation due to decompensation within 24 hours; and cohort 4: patients transferred to PICU unexpectedly from an acute care floor after a rapid response without subsequent decompensation in 24 hours. Interventions: Two clinicians used the instrument to independently review records in each cohort for diagnostic errors, defined as missed opportunities to make a correct or timely diagnosis. Errors were confirmed by senior expert clinicians. Measurements and Main Results: Diagnostic errors were present in 26 of 214 high-risk patient records (12.1%; 95% CI, 8.2-17.5%) with the following frequency distribution: cohort 1: two of 16 (12.5%); cohort 2: one of 41 (2.4%); cohort 3: 13 of 44 (29.5%); and cohort 4: 10 of 113 (8.8%). Overall initial reviewer agreement was 93.6% (κ, 0.72). Infections and neurologic conditions were the most commonly missed diagnoses across all high-risk cohorts (16/26). Conclusions: The Safer Dx Instrument has high reliability and validity for diagnostic error detection when used in high-risk pediatric care settings. With further validation in additional clinical settings, it could be useful to enhance learning and feedback about diagnostic safety in children.

KW - critical care

KW - diagnostic error

KW - measurement

KW - patient safety

KW - quality improvement

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85010842241&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/PCC.0000000000001059

DO - 10.1097/PCC.0000000000001059

M3 - Article

VL - 18

SP - 265

EP - 271

JO - Pediatric Critical Care Medicine

JF - Pediatric Critical Care Medicine

SN - 1529-7535

IS - 3

ER -