Research into the nature, type, and contributing factors of adverse events (AE) in primary care is required to develop successful safety interventions. This study used medical record review to determine the prevalence, preventability, severity, type, and contributory factors of AE in primary care in Madrid, Spain. The prevalence of AEs was 5%, with the majority determined to be preventable. Most resulted in mild harm, and most contributory factors were patient-related (e.g., self-administered medications).

Patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with a chief complaint of dizziness require prompt assessment to rule in or out a serious diagnosis such as stroke. A retrospective chart review was performed on more than 1,500 adult patients presenting to the ED with dizziness to estimate vestibular syndrome classifications (i.e., acute, episodic, chronic) and rates of misdiagnosis. Approximately 20% of patients were diagnosed with acute vestibular syndrome (e.g., stroke) and 10% had an unclear vestibular syndrome at time of ED discharge. Of those with follow-up exams, nearly one-third received a different diagnosis, but only 3.2% received a different vestibular classification.

Missed diagnostic opportunities often involve multiple process breakdowns and can lead to serious avoidable patient harm. Based on a web-based survey of 1,594 emergency medicine physicians, missed diagnostic opportunities most frequently occur in children who present to the emergency department with undifferentiated symptoms (e.g., abdominal pain, fever, vomiting) and often involve issues related to the patient/parent-provider interaction, such as misinterpreting patient history or inadequate physical exam.

AHRQ's 2022 report Diagnostic Errors in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review, which reported an estimated 7.4 million patients receive a misdiagnosis in the emergency department every year, garnered public, practitioner, and researcher attention. In this peer-reviewed commentary, the authors critique several components of the report. They also support AHRQ's recommended next steps, and further call for additional public and private funding opportunities to continue improving diagnostic accuracy in the emergency department.

Symptom–Disease Pair Analysis of Diagnostic Error (SPADE) is a framework to measure diagnostic errors using existing databases, such as electronic health records or administrative claims. The original developers of the SPADE framework provide additional guidance on types of comparator groups, how to select the appropriate group, and what inferences can be drawn from the analysis.

The majority of healthcare providers use electronic health record (EHR) systems but these systems are not infallible. This analysis used closed malpractice claims from the CRICO malpractice insurance database to identify whether the EHR contributes to diagnostic error, the types of errors, and where in the diagnostic process errors occur. EHR contributed to diagnostic error in 61% of claims, the majority in outpatient care, and 92% at the testing stage.

Peer feedback is an emerging approach to improving clinicians’ diagnostic reasoning skills. The authors outline several barriers to diagnostic performance feedback and propose solutions to improve diagnostic performance.

COVID-19 ushered in new diagnostic challenges and changes in care practices. In this study conducted during the first wave of the pandemic, charts for hospitalized adult patients under investigation (PUI) for COVID-19 were reviewed for potential diagnostic error. Diagnostic errors were identified in 14% of cases; patients with and without diagnostic errors were statistically similar and errors were not associated with pandemic-related change practices.

Improving diagnosis and diagnostic error-related harm is a major focus within patient safety. Building on previous research, patients and patient advocates participated in a systematic prioritization exercise and prioritized ten diagnostic error reduction research priorities. Prioritized questions focused on improving care integration/coordination, communication between clinicians and patients/caregivers, improving patient reporting systems, and improved understanding of implicit bias, and underlying factors increasing risk for diagnostic errors among vulnerable patient groups. The authors note that these priorities differed more than those identified previously by diagnostic safety experts and stakeholders.

Interruptions during diagnostic decision-making and clinical tasks can adversely impact patient care. This article reviews empirically-tested strategies from healthcare and cognitive psychology that can inform future research on mitigating the effects of interruptions during diagnostic decision-making. The authors highlight strategies to minimize the negative impacts of interruptions and strategies to prevent distractions altogether; in addition, they propose research priorities within the field of diagnostic safety.

A 2012 review estimated that diagnostic errors in the intensive care unit (ICU) may contribute to up to 8% of patient deaths. This narrative review identifies common causes of diagnostic error (e.g., cognitive bias) and suggests a diagnostic framework. Cognitive de-biasing strategies and increasing time spent with the patient are recommended as strategies for reducing diagnostic errors in this vulnerable patient population.