Cargando…

Strategies to reduce diagnostic errors: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effectiveness of audit and communication strategies to reduce diagnostic errors made by clinicians. METHODS: MEDLINE complete, CINHAL complete, EMBASE, PSNet and Google Advanced. Electronic and manual search of articles on audit systems and communication strategies or int...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abimanyi-Ochom, Julie, Bohingamu Mudiyanselage, Shalika, Catchpool, Max, Firipis, Marnie, Wanni Arachchige Dona, Sithara, Watts, Jennifer J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6716834/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31470839
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-019-0901-1
_version_ 1783447449815220224
author Abimanyi-Ochom, Julie
Bohingamu Mudiyanselage, Shalika
Catchpool, Max
Firipis, Marnie
Wanni Arachchige Dona, Sithara
Watts, Jennifer J.
author_facet Abimanyi-Ochom, Julie
Bohingamu Mudiyanselage, Shalika
Catchpool, Max
Firipis, Marnie
Wanni Arachchige Dona, Sithara
Watts, Jennifer J.
author_sort Abimanyi-Ochom, Julie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effectiveness of audit and communication strategies to reduce diagnostic errors made by clinicians. METHODS: MEDLINE complete, CINHAL complete, EMBASE, PSNet and Google Advanced. Electronic and manual search of articles on audit systems and communication strategies or interventions, searched for papers published between January 1990 and April 2017. We included studies with interventions implemented by clinicians in a clinical environment with real patients. RESULTS: A total of 2431 articles were screened of which 26 studies met inclusion criteria. Data extraction was conducted by two groups, each group comprising two independent reviewers. Articles were classified by communication (6) or audit strategies (20) to reduce diagnostic error in clinical settings. The most common interventions were delivered as technology-based systems n = 16 (62%) and within an acute care setting n = 15 (57%). Nine studies reported randomised controlled trials. Three RCT studies on communication interventions and 3 RCTs on audit strategies found the interventions to be effective in reducing diagnostic errors. CONCLUSION: Despite numerous studies on interventions targeting diagnostic errors, our analyses revealed limited evidence on interventions being practically used in clinical settings and a bias of studies originating from the US (n = 19, 73% of included studies). There is some evidence that trigger algorithms, including computer based and alert systems, may reduce delayed diagnosis and improve diagnostic accuracy. In trauma settings, strategies such as additional patient review (e.g. trauma teams) reduced missed diagnosis and in radiology departments review strategies such as team meetings and error documentation may reduce diagnostic error rates over time. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO database under registration number CRD42017067056. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12911-019-0901-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6716834
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67168342019-09-04 Strategies to reduce diagnostic errors: a systematic review Abimanyi-Ochom, Julie Bohingamu Mudiyanselage, Shalika Catchpool, Max Firipis, Marnie Wanni Arachchige Dona, Sithara Watts, Jennifer J. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Research Article BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effectiveness of audit and communication strategies to reduce diagnostic errors made by clinicians. METHODS: MEDLINE complete, CINHAL complete, EMBASE, PSNet and Google Advanced. Electronic and manual search of articles on audit systems and communication strategies or interventions, searched for papers published between January 1990 and April 2017. We included studies with interventions implemented by clinicians in a clinical environment with real patients. RESULTS: A total of 2431 articles were screened of which 26 studies met inclusion criteria. Data extraction was conducted by two groups, each group comprising two independent reviewers. Articles were classified by communication (6) or audit strategies (20) to reduce diagnostic error in clinical settings. The most common interventions were delivered as technology-based systems n = 16 (62%) and within an acute care setting n = 15 (57%). Nine studies reported randomised controlled trials. Three RCT studies on communication interventions and 3 RCTs on audit strategies found the interventions to be effective in reducing diagnostic errors. CONCLUSION: Despite numerous studies on interventions targeting diagnostic errors, our analyses revealed limited evidence on interventions being practically used in clinical settings and a bias of studies originating from the US (n = 19, 73% of included studies). There is some evidence that trigger algorithms, including computer based and alert systems, may reduce delayed diagnosis and improve diagnostic accuracy. In trauma settings, strategies such as additional patient review (e.g. trauma teams) reduced missed diagnosis and in radiology departments review strategies such as team meetings and error documentation may reduce diagnostic error rates over time. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO database under registration number CRD42017067056. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12911-019-0901-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-08-30 /pmc/articles/PMC6716834/ /pubmed/31470839 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-019-0901-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Abimanyi-Ochom, Julie
Bohingamu Mudiyanselage, Shalika
Catchpool, Max
Firipis, Marnie
Wanni Arachchige Dona, Sithara
Watts, Jennifer J.
Strategies to reduce diagnostic errors: a systematic review
title Strategies to reduce diagnostic errors: a systematic review
title_full Strategies to reduce diagnostic errors: a systematic review
title_fullStr Strategies to reduce diagnostic errors: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Strategies to reduce diagnostic errors: a systematic review
title_short Strategies to reduce diagnostic errors: a systematic review
title_sort strategies to reduce diagnostic errors: a systematic review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6716834/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31470839
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-019-0901-1
work_keys_str_mv AT abimanyiochomjulie strategiestoreducediagnosticerrorsasystematicreview
AT bohingamumudiyanselageshalika strategiestoreducediagnosticerrorsasystematicreview
AT catchpoolmax strategiestoreducediagnosticerrorsasystematicreview
AT firipismarnie strategiestoreducediagnosticerrorsasystematicreview
AT wanniarachchigedonasithara strategiestoreducediagnosticerrorsasystematicreview
AT wattsjenniferj strategiestoreducediagnosticerrorsasystematicreview