Literature DB >> 11304844

Are coroners' necropsies necessary? A prospective study examining whether a "view and grant" system of death certification could be introduced into England and Wales.

G N Rutty1, R M Duerden, N Carter, J C Clark.   

Abstract

AIMS: To determine whether the cause of death could be accurately predicted without the need for a necropsy, and thus to consider whether a "view and grant" system of issuing a cause of death could be introduced into England and Wales.
METHOD: A one year prospective necropsy study was performed incorporating 568 deaths. Before necropsy, in each case the cause of death was predicted from the available history without examination of the body, and this cause was then compared with the cause of death found at necropsy.
RESULTS: The ability of the pathologist involved in the study to predict a cause of death before necropsy, either while in the mortuary or as a paper exercise, was shown to vary between 61% and 74% of cases. After the necropsy, the number of correct predicted causes of death ranged from 39% to 46%. Ischaemic heart disease was found to be the most common and most accurately predicted cause of death. Some natural diseases were frequently misdiagnosed, whereas certain types of unnatural disease were always identified correctly.
CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the advantages and disadvantages of a view and grant system. Although it identifies a potential use of such a system, in some cases such as natural cardiac disease, because of the potentially high diagnostic error rate, the continuation of the present system of postmortem examination as part of the coroner's enquiry is recommended.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11304844      PMCID: PMC1731404          DOI: 10.1136/jcp.54.4.279

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Pathol        ISSN: 0021-9746            Impact factor:   3.411


  66 in total

1.  The coroner's necropsy in sudden death: an under-used source of epidemiological information.

Authors:  J P O'Sullivan
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 3.411

2.  Factors predicting cases with unexpected clinical findings at necropsy.

Authors:  I A Robinson; N J Marley
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 3.411

3.  Autopsy as quality assurance in the intensive care unit.

Authors:  P Fernandez-Segoviano; A Lázaro; A Esteban; J M Rubio; J R Iruretagoyena
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 7.598

4.  Diagnostic errors discovered at autopsy.

Authors:  M Britton
Journal:  Acta Med Scand       Date:  1974-09

5.  Clinical diagnostic accuracy audited by autopsy in a university hospital in two eras.

Authors:  B Veress; I Alafuzoff
Journal:  Qual Assur Health Care       Date:  1993-12

6.  Comparison between predicted cause of death and cause of death found at autopsy in medicolegal autopsy material.

Authors:  B Gerdin; O Lindquist
Journal:  Z Rechtsmed       Date:  1980

7.  Do autopsies of critically ill patients reveal important findings that were clinically undetected?

Authors:  S A Blosser; H E Zimmerman; J L Stauffer
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 7.598

8.  Reliability of death certifications for different types of cancer. An autopsy survey.

Authors:  F Mollo; E Bertoldo; G Grandi; F Cavallo
Journal:  Pathol Res Pract       Date:  1986-08       Impact factor: 3.250

9.  Correlation between clinical diagnoses and autopsy findings in critically ill children.

Authors:  J J Stambouly; E Kahn; R A Boxer
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 7.124

10.  Autopsy diagnoses of malignant neoplasms: how often are clinical diagnoses incorrect?

Authors:  E C Burton; D A Troxclair; W P Newman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-10-14       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  11 in total

1.  Training for necropsy.

Authors:  M Jones
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  Are coroners' necropsies necessary? A prospective study examining whether a "view and grant" system of death certification could be introduced into England and Wales.

Authors:  S Leadbeatter; D James; A Davison
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 3.  How can we reduce the number of coroner autopsies? Lessons from Scotland and the Dundee initiative.

Authors:  Derrick Pounder; Matthew Jones; Heiko Peschel
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 5.344

4.  Virtopsy versus digital autopsy: virtual autopsy.

Authors:  C Pomara; V Fineschi; G Scalzo; G Guglielmi
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2009-08-07       Impact factor: 3.469

5.  Do we know what people die of in the emergency department?

Authors:  F Mushtaq; D Ritchie
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 2.740

6.  Sharp Force Injuries at the University Hospital of the West Indies, Kingston, Jamaica: A Seventeen-year Autopsy Review.

Authors:  A Neblett; N P Williams
Journal:  West Indian Med J       Date:  2014-05-08       Impact factor: 0.171

7.  Limited post-mortem examination. An alternative and viable way to avoid full examination?

Authors:  Beng Beng Ong; Nathan Milne
Journal:  Forensic Sci Med Pathol       Date:  2007-10-02       Impact factor: 2.007

8.  Unexpected findings and misdiagnoses in coroner's autopsies performed for trauma at the University of the West Indies, Kingston, Jamaica.

Authors:  Althea C G Neblett; Tracey N Gibson; Carlos T Escoffery
Journal:  Forensic Sci Med Pathol       Date:  2018-05-09       Impact factor: 2.007

9.  The autopsy: lessons from the National Confidential Enquiry into Perioperative Deaths.

Authors:  Norman J Carr; Margaret M E Burke; Catherine M Corbishley; Valerie Suarez; Keith P McCarthy
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 18.000

10.  A bite into the history of the autopsy : From ancient roots to modern decay.

Authors:  Julian L Burton
Journal:  Forensic Sci Med Pathol       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 2.456

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.