All Content

Cognitive biases can impede decision-making and lead to poor care. This article summarizes the common types of cognitive errors and biases and highlights how cognitive biases can contribute to diagnostic errors. The authors apply these common types of errors and biases in four case examples and discuss how to mitigate these biases during the diagnostic process. 

Wrong blood in tube (WBIT) errors can result in serious diagnostic and treatment errors, but may go unrecognized by clinical staff. In this study, machine learning was used to identify potential WBIT errors which were then compared to manual review by laboratory staff. The machine learning models showed higher accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity compared to manual review. 

Black and brown patients have experienced disproportionately poorer outcomes from COVID-19 infection as compared with white patients. This study found that patients who identified as Asian, Black, or Hispanic may not have received timely diagnosis or treatment due to inaccurately measured pulse oximetry (SpO2). These inaccuracies and discrepancies should be considered in COVID outcome research as well as other respiratory illnesses that rely on SpO2 measurement for treatment.

Achieving diagnostic safety requires multidisciplinary approaches. Based on interviews with safety leaders across the United States, this article discusses how different organizations approach diagnostic safety. Respondents discuss barriers to implementing diagnostic safety activities as well as strategies to overcome barriers, highlighting the role of patient engagement and dedicated diagnostic safety champions.

Teaching clinical reasoning to medical students is a key strategy for reducing diagnostic errors. This paper describes a new longitudinal clinical reasoning curriculum taught in a US medical school’s first and second year of medical training. Students reported high self-efficacy after completing the curriculum; however, a competency audit revealed room for improvement in including system-related aspects of care.

Clinical reasoning is an essential component of diagnostic safety. This paper describes the development of a new curriculum to improve clinical reasoning skills and processes in medical students. The curriculum uses several educational strategies (e.g., classroom teaching, simulation training, patient encounters) during pre-clerkship and clerkship to improve clinical reasoning skills across several domains (theory, patient assessment, diagnosis, and shared decision-making).

Missed or delayed diagnosis in primary care may result in serious complications for patients. This prospective study followed adults presenting to primary care with new or unresolved symptoms for 12 months. 32% of patients received a diagnosis within one month; most of the rest still did not have a diagnosis at 12 months (50%). The authors suggest interventions aimed at improving diagnosis should be system-based, not specific to a single medical issue or population.

In 2019, a consensus group identified twelve competencies to improve diagnostic education. This article details next steps for incorporating competencies into interprofessional health education: 1) Developing a shared, common language for diagnosis, 2) developing the necessary content, 3) developing assessment tools, 4) promoting faculty development, and 5) spreading awareness of the need to improve education in regard to diagnosis.

Diagnostic errors can be identified by measuring concordance of initial and final diagnosis, for instance admission and discharge diagnoses. In this study, researchers developed and tested an automated trigger system to determine concordance between pairs of diagnoses. In comparison to the reference standard (concordance determined by experts) the automated system performance was excellent.

Checklists are used to improve patient outcomes in a wide variety of clinical settings and processes, such as childbirth, surgery, and diagnosis. This review applied the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety 2.0 (SEIPS 2.0) human factors framework to 25 diagnostic checklists. Checklists were characterized within the three primary components (work systems, processes, and outcomes) and subcomponents. Checklists addressing the Task subcomponent were associated with a reduction in diagnostic errors. Several subcomponents were not addressed (e.g. External Environment, Organization) and present an opportunity for future research.

Delays in diagnosis and treatment can lead to poor outcomes for patients. Researchers reviewed root cause analysis (RCA) reports to identify factors contributing to delays in diagnosis and treatment among surgical patients at the Veterans Health Administration. Of the 163 RCAs identified, 73% reflected delays in treatment, 15% reflected delays in diagnosis, and 12% reflected delays in surgery. Policies and processes (e.g., lack of standardized processes, procedures not followed correctly) was the largest contributing factor, followed by communication challenges, and equipment or supply issues.

The 2015 National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) report Improving Diagnosis in Healthcare defined diagnostic error as “the failure to (a) establish an accurate and timely explanation of the patient's health problem(s) or (b) communicate that explanation to the patient.” This review and interviews with subject matter experts explored how the NASEM definition of diagnostic error has been operationalized in the literature. Of the sixteen included studies, only five operationalized the definition and only three studied communicating with the patient. The authors recommend formulating a set of common approaches to operationalize each of the three components of the NASEM definition. Patients and family should be included in defining the construct of “communication to the patient.”

Common Formats for Event Reporting allow organizations to collect and share standardized adverse event data. This study conducted a usability assessment of AHRQ’s proposed Common Formats Event Reporting for Diagnostic Safety (CFER-DS). Feedback from eight patient safety experts was generally positive, although they also identified potential reporter burden, with each report taking 30-90 minutes to complete. CFER-DS Version 1.0 is now available.

Understanding human causes of diagnostic errors can lead to more specific targeted, specific recommendations and interventions. Using three classification instruments, researchers examined a series of serious adverse events related to diagnostic errors in the emergency department. Most of the human errors were based on intended actions and could be classified as mistakes or violations. Errors were more frequently made during the assessment and testing phases of the diagnostic process.