Literature DB >> 29222573

Incidence and Causes of Overdiagnosis of Optic Neuritis.

Leanne Stunkel1, Nathan H Kung2, Bradley Wilson2, Collin M McClelland3, Gregory P Van Stavern2.   

Abstract

Importance: Diagnostic error is an important source of medical error. Overdiagnosis of optic neuritis may prompt unnecessary and costly diagnostic tests, procedures, and treatments. Objective: To assess the incidence of and characterize factors contributing to overdiagnosis of acute optic neuritis. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this retrospective clinic-based cross-sectional study of new patient encounters, 122 patients referred for acute optic neuritis at a university-based Midwestern neuro-ophthalmology clinic between January 2014 and October 2016 were studied. Data were analyzed from September 2016 to July 2017. Interventions: Definite diagnosis was determined by neuro-ophthalmologists. For patients with alterative diagnoses, the Diagnosis Error Evaluation and Research taxonomy tool was applied to categorize the type of diagnostic error. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the primary type of diagnostic error in patients erroneously diagnosed as having optic neuritis. Secondary outcomes included final diagnosis and interventions undergone prior to referral.
Results: A total of 122 patients were referred with acute optic neuritis during the study period; 88 (72.1%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 42.6 (14.0) years. Of these, 49 patients (40.2%; 95% CI, 31.4-49.4) were confirmed to have optic neuritis, and 73 (59.8%; 95% CI, 50.6-68.6) had an alternative diagnosis. The most common alternative diagnoses were headache and eye pain, functional visual loss, and other optic neuropathies, particularly nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy. The most common diagnostic error was eliciting or interpreting critical elements of history, which occurred in 24 of 73 patients (33%) with alternative diagnoses. Other common errors included errors weighing or considering alternative diagnoses (23 patients [32%]), errors weighing or interpreting physical examination findings (15 patients [21%]), and misinterpreting diagnostic test results (11 patients [15%]). In patients with alterative diagnoses, 12 (16%) had normal magnetic resonance imaging findings preceding the referral, 12 (16%) had received a lumbar puncture, and 8 (11%) had received unnecessary treatment with intravenous steroids. Conclusions and Relevance: These data suggest that nearly 60% (95% CI, 50.6-68.6) of patients referred for optic neuritis have an alternative diagnosis, with the most common errors being overreliance on a single item of history and failure to consider alternative diagnoses. Understanding pitfalls leading to overdiagnosis of optic neuritis may improve clinicians' diagnostic process.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29222573      PMCID: PMC5833602          DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.5470

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol        ISSN: 2168-6165            Impact factor:   7.389


  26 in total

1.  A randomized, controlled trial of oral high-dose methylprednisolone in acute optic neuritis.

Authors:  F Sellebjerg; H S Nielsen; J L Frederiksen; J Olesen
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  1999-04-22       Impact factor: 9.910

Review 2.  Clinical practice. Optic neuritis.

Authors:  Laura J Balcer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2006-03-23       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  New developments in the treatment of optic neuritis.

Authors:  Thomas M Jenkins; Ahmed T Toosy
Journal:  Eye Brain       Date:  2010-06-17

4.  Premature conclusions in diagnostic reasoning.

Authors:  A E Voytovich; R M Rippey; A Suffredini
Journal:  J Med Educ       Date:  1985-04

5.  The clinical and paraclinical profile of optic neuritis: a prospective study.

Authors:  M Söderström
Journal:  Ital J Neurol Sci       Date:  1995-04

6.  Migraine pain location: a tertiary care study of 1283 migraineurs.

Authors:  Leslie Kelman
Journal:  Headache       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 5.887

7.  The clinical profile of optic neuritis. Experience of the Optic Neuritis Treatment Trial. Optic Neuritis Study Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  1991-12

Review 8.  Acute demyelinating optic neuritis.

Authors:  Rod Foroozan; Lawrence M Buono; Peter J Savino; Robert C Sergott
Journal:  Curr Opin Ophthalmol       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.761

9.  A randomized, controlled trial of corticosteroids in the treatment of acute optic neuritis. The Optic Neuritis Study Group.

Authors:  R W Beck; P A Cleary; M M Anderson; J L Keltner; W T Shults; D I Kaufman; E G Buckley; J J Corbett; M J Kupersmith; N R Miller
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1992-02-27       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Characteristics of patients presenting with ocular pain.

Authors:  Skyler Wolfe; Gregory Van Stavern
Journal:  Can J Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 1.882

View more
  17 in total

Review 1.  Diagnostic error and neuro-ophthalmology.

Authors:  Leanne Stunkel; Nancy J Newman; Valérie Biousse
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurol       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 5.710

Review 2.  Misdiagnosis of multiple sclerosis: Impact of the 2017 McDonald criteria on clinical practice.

Authors:  Andrew J Solomon; Robert T Naismith; Anne H Cross
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2018-10-31       Impact factor: 9.910

3.  Inclusion of optic nerve involvement in dissemination in space criteria for multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Wallace J Brownlee; Katherine A Miszkiel; Carmen Tur; Frederik Barkhof; David H Miller; Olga Ciccarelli
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2018-08-17       Impact factor: 9.910

4.  Adherence to Clinical Trial Supported Evaluation of Optic Neuritis.

Authors:  Elana Meer; Kenneth S Shindler; Yinxi Yu; Brian L VanderBeek
Journal:  Ophthalmic Epidemiol       Date:  2019-05-29       Impact factor: 1.648

5.  Predictive Value of International Classification of Diseases Codes for Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension in a University Health System.

Authors:  Fareshta Khushzad; Riya Kumar; Irma Muminovic; Heather E Moss
Journal:  J Neuroophthalmol       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 3.042

Review 6.  Big Data Research in Neuro-Ophthalmology: Promises and Pitfalls.

Authors:  Heather E Moss; Charlotte E Joslin; Daniel S Rubin; Steven Roth
Journal:  J Neuroophthalmol       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 3.042

7.  Should "Retro-ocular Pain, Photophobia and Visual Acuity Loss" Be Recognised as a Distinct Entity? The ROPPVAL Syndrome.

Authors:  Francesco Pellegrini; Erika Mandarà; Daniele Brocca
Journal:  Neuroophthalmology       Date:  2021-05-03

Review 8.  The changing landscape of optic neuritis: a narrative review.

Authors:  Lindsey B De Lott; Jeffrey L Bennett; Fiona Costello
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2021-01-03       Impact factor: 4.849

9.  Factors Associated With Increased Emergency Department Utilization in Patients With Acute Optic Neuritis.

Authors:  Elena A Muro-Fuentes; Heather E Moss
Journal:  J Neuroophthalmol       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 4.415

10.  Validity of International Classification of Diseases Codes for Identifying Neuro-Ophthalmic Disease in Large Data Sets: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ali G Hamedani; Lindsey B De Lott; Tatiana Deveney; Heather E Moss
Journal:  J Neuroophthalmol       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 4.415

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.