{"title":"罕见情况下的诊断错误:对诊断错误病例报告的系统回顾。","authors":"Yukinori Harada, Takashi Watari, Hiroyuki Nagano, Tomoharu Suzuki, Kotaro Kunitomo, Taiju Miyagami, Tetsuro Aita, Kosuke Ishizuka, Mika Maebashi, Taku Harada, Tetsu Sakamoto, Shusaku Tomiyama, Taro Shimizu","doi":"10.1515/dx-2023-0030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the usefulness of case reports as sources for research on diagnostic errors in uncommon diseases and atypical presentations.</p><p><strong>Content: </strong>We reviewed 563 case reports of diagnostic error. The commonality of the final diagnoses was classified based on the description in the articles, Orphanet, or epidemiological data on available references; the typicality of presentation was classified based on the description in the articles and the judgment of the physician researchers. Diagnosis Error Evaluation and Research (DEER), Reliable Diagnosis Challenges (RDC), and Generic Diagnostic Pitfalls (GDP) taxonomies were used to assess the factors contributing to diagnostic errors.</p><p><strong>Summary and outlook: </strong>Excluding three cases in that commonality could not be classified, 560 cases were classified into four categories: typical presentations of common diseases (60, 10.7 %), atypical presentations of common diseases (35, 6.2 %), typical presentations of uncommon diseases (276, 49.3 %), and atypical presentations of uncommon diseases (189, 33.8 %). The most important DEER taxonomy was \"Failure/delay in considering the diagnosis\" among the four categories, whereas the most important RDC and GDP taxonomies varied with the categories. Case reports can be a useful data source for research on the diagnostic errors of uncommon diseases with or without atypical presentations.</p>","PeriodicalId":11273,"journal":{"name":"Diagnosis","volume":" ","pages":"329-336"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic errors in uncommon conditions: a systematic review of case reports of diagnostic errors.\",\"authors\":\"Yukinori Harada, Takashi Watari, Hiroyuki Nagano, Tomoharu Suzuki, Kotaro Kunitomo, Taiju Miyagami, Tetsuro Aita, Kosuke Ishizuka, Mika Maebashi, Taku Harada, Tetsu Sakamoto, Shusaku Tomiyama, Taro Shimizu\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/dx-2023-0030\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the usefulness of case reports as sources for research on diagnostic errors in uncommon diseases and atypical presentations.</p><p><strong>Content: </strong>We reviewed 563 case reports of diagnostic error. The commonality of the final diagnoses was classified based on the description in the articles, Orphanet, or epidemiological data on available references; the typicality of presentation was classified based on the description in the articles and the judgment of the physician researchers. Diagnosis Error Evaluation and Research (DEER), Reliable Diagnosis Challenges (RDC), and Generic Diagnostic Pitfalls (GDP) taxonomies were used to assess the factors contributing to diagnostic errors.</p><p><strong>Summary and outlook: </strong>Excluding three cases in that commonality could not be classified, 560 cases were classified into four categories: typical presentations of common diseases (60, 10.7 %), atypical presentations of common diseases (35, 6.2 %), typical presentations of uncommon diseases (276, 49.3 %), and atypical presentations of uncommon diseases (189, 33.8 %). The most important DEER taxonomy was \\\"Failure/delay in considering the diagnosis\\\" among the four categories, whereas the most important RDC and GDP taxonomies varied with the categories. Case reports can be a useful data source for research on the diagnostic errors of uncommon diseases with or without atypical presentations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11273,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Diagnosis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"329-336\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Diagnosis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2023-0030\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnosis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2023-0030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Diagnostic errors in uncommon conditions: a systematic review of case reports of diagnostic errors.
Objectives: To assess the usefulness of case reports as sources for research on diagnostic errors in uncommon diseases and atypical presentations.
Content: We reviewed 563 case reports of diagnostic error. The commonality of the final diagnoses was classified based on the description in the articles, Orphanet, or epidemiological data on available references; the typicality of presentation was classified based on the description in the articles and the judgment of the physician researchers. Diagnosis Error Evaluation and Research (DEER), Reliable Diagnosis Challenges (RDC), and Generic Diagnostic Pitfalls (GDP) taxonomies were used to assess the factors contributing to diagnostic errors.
Summary and outlook: Excluding three cases in that commonality could not be classified, 560 cases were classified into four categories: typical presentations of common diseases (60, 10.7 %), atypical presentations of common diseases (35, 6.2 %), typical presentations of uncommon diseases (276, 49.3 %), and atypical presentations of uncommon diseases (189, 33.8 %). The most important DEER taxonomy was "Failure/delay in considering the diagnosis" among the four categories, whereas the most important RDC and GDP taxonomies varied with the categories. Case reports can be a useful data source for research on the diagnostic errors of uncommon diseases with or without atypical presentations.
期刊介绍:
Diagnosis focuses on how diagnosis can be advanced, how it is taught, and how and why it can fail, leading to diagnostic errors. The journal welcomes both fundamental and applied works, improvement initiatives, opinions, and debates to encourage new thinking on improving this critical aspect of healthcare quality. Topics: -Factors that promote diagnostic quality and safety -Clinical reasoning -Diagnostic errors in medicine -The factors that contribute to diagnostic error: human factors, cognitive issues, and system-related breakdowns -Improving the value of diagnosis – eliminating waste and unnecessary testing -How culture and removing blame promote awareness of diagnostic errors -Training and education related to clinical reasoning and diagnostic skills -Advances in laboratory testing and imaging that improve diagnostic capability -Local, national and international initiatives to reduce diagnostic error