Literature DB >> 16729476

[Discrepancies between clinical and pathological diagnosis in a polyvalent intensive care service].

M Magret Iglesias1, L Vidaur Tello, S Fernández Olsina, J F García Fontgivell, S Blázquez Vilàs, S Alonso Rubio, E Díaz Santos, J J Sirvent Calvera, J Rello.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Analyze the frequency and spectrum of the most relevant diseases found in the necropsic study. Assess the association between stay in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) less than 24 hours and rate of diagnostic errors.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective, observational study during a 46 month period in a polyvalent ICU. The differences between the clinical and pathological diagnoses were established based on Goldman's classification.
RESULTS: A total of 85 autopsies out of 520 exitus (16.3%) were done. Five patients were excluded due to incomplete information. Of the 80 cases, we found 30 patients with major errors, 21 with therapeutic and prognostic repercussion, 9 in which the therapeutic strategy had not been modified. The most frequently found diagnosis in type I error was bacterial infection followed by cardiovascular disease. Major error rate with therapeutic repercussion was superior in patients with a stay in the ICU less than 24 hours (40% vs 21%; p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Autopsy continues to be a useful tool to assess quality of clinical diagnosis. The diagnostic errors with therapeutic repercussion are bacterial infections and cardiovascular disease. Patients with a stay less than 24 hours have a higher rate of type I diagnostic errors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16729476     DOI: 10.1016/s0210-5691(06)74481-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Intensiva        ISSN: 0210-5691            Impact factor:   2.491


  2 in total

1.  Premortem clinical diagnoses and postmortem autopsy findings: discrepancies in critically ill cancer patients.

Authors:  Stephen M Pastores; Alina Dulu; Louis Voigt; Nina Raoof; Margarita Alicea; Neil A Halpern
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 9.097

2.  Update in Infectious Diseases 2018.

Authors:  F J Candel; T Emilov; I Diaz de la Torre; A Ruedas; J M Viñuela Prieto; C Visiedo; J Martínez-Jordán; L López-González; M Matesanz; A Arribi
Journal:  Rev Esp Quimioter       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 1.553

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.