López-Collada VR, Coronel-Martínez DL

Language: Spanish
References: 35
Page: 232-240
PDF size: 152.31 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction. The autopsy has been recognized as a useful tool for medical education and for quality improvement, evaluating therapeutic and diagnostic measures. In the last 50 years, the autopsy rates have constantly declined. Interestingly, between 1972 and 2002, the discrepancies between clinical diagnoses and autopsy findings haven’t diminished, even with all the technological improvements now available. This research enables us to determine the discrepancy rate between our clinical diagnosis and autopsy results, as well as the main diseases that need diagnostic or therapeutic improvements in our hospital. Our objectives were: 1. To obtain the discrepancy rate between clinical diagnoses and autopsy findings. 2. To determine the most frequent type of discrepancy, according with the Goldman criteria, modified by Battle, and 3. To evaluate the possible association of these discrepancies with the number of admissions, length of stay, patient’s age and physicionals age.
Material and methods. A retrospective, observational, comparative and transversal study. Sample: All cases that had an autopsy between January 1^st and December 31^th 2004. Cases with an incomplete record were excluded. The main variables analyzed were: age, gender, number of admissions and their length of stay, main clinical service, type of autopsy, main clinical and autopsy diagnoses and probable cause of death.
Results. In the year 2004 there were 209 deaths registered with 62 autopsies (29.7% rate). We found a discrepancy in the main clinical diagnosis in 15 cases (24.6%); and, according with the Goldman criteria, modified by Battle, we found a class I discrepancy in 5 cases (8.2%) and a class II discrepancy in 4 cases (6.6%). We didn’t find significant statistical differences in patients older than a year compared with patients less than 1 year old. There were no significant differences regarding the number of admissions and their length of stay, or variations with the attending physician’s age.
Conclusions. Our main discrepancies were in infectious diseases, similar to other studies. Our discrepancy numbers are similar to others reported in the world. It is important to analyze these cases with the physicians involved, and together learn from our mistakes, working to improve diagnostic and therapeutic measures, and overall, quality of care.

REFERENCES

1. Navarro-Beltrán E. Diccionario terminológico de ciencias médicas. Décimo tercera ed. Barcelona: Salvat Editores; 1992. p. 143-4.

2. Council on Scientific Affairs. Autopsy: a comprehensive review of current issues. JAMA. 1987; 258: 364-9.

3. Bowman HE, Williams MJ. Revitalizing the ultimate medical consultation. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1984; 108: 437-8.

4. Anderson RE, Weston JT, Craighead JE, Lacy PE, Wissler RW, Hill RB. The autopsy: Past, present and future. JAMA. 1979; 242: 1056-9.

5. Zarbo RJ, Baker PB, Howanitz PJ. The autopsy as a performance measurement tool, diagnostic discrepancies and unresolved clinical questions. A college of American Pathologists Q-probes study of 2 479 autopsies from 248 institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1999; 123: 191-8.

6. Hill R. The current status of autopsies in medical care in the USA. Qual Assur Health Care. 1993; 5: 309-13.

7. Sarode VR, Datta BN, Banerjee AK, Banerjee CK, Joshi K, Bhusnurmath B, et al. Autopsy findings and clinical diagnoses: A review of 1 000 cases. Hum Pathol. 1993; 24: 194-8.

8. Landefeld CS, Chren MM, Myers A, Geller R, Robbins S, Goldman L. Diagnostic yield of the autopsy in a university hospital and community hospital. N Engl J Med. 1988; 318: 1249-54.

9. Sonderegger K, Burger S, Muntwyler J, Salomon F. Diagnostic errors in three medical eras: a necropsy study. Lancet. 2000; 355: 2027-31.

10. Shojania KG, Burton EC, McDonald KM, Goldman L. Changes in rates of autopsy-detected diagnostic errors over time, a systematic review. JAMA. 2003; 289: 2849-56.

11. Burton EC, Nemetz PN. Medical error and outcomes measures: where have all the autopsies gone? Medscape Gen Med. 2002; 2000: E8.

12. Walsh CJ. Autopsy rates in US hospitals. PAS Rep. 1974; 12: 1-4.

13. Hospital General de México. Informe de la Dirección General. Enero-junio; 2003.

14. Cameron HM, McGoogan E. A prospective study of 1 152 hospital autopsies, inaccuracies in death certification. J Pathol. 1981; 133: 273-83.

15. Landefeld CS, Chren MM, Myers A, Geller R, Robbins S, Goldman L. Diagnostic yield of the autopsy in a university hospital and a community hospital. N Engl J Med. 1988; 318: 1249-54.

16. Burton E, Troxclair D, Newman WP. Autopsy diagnoses of malignant neoplasms. How often are clinical diagnoses incorrect? JAMA. 1998; 280: 1245-8.

17. Inoue K, Yoshiola K, Kawahito Y. Is the discordance rate of malignancy still high (letter)? Arch Intern Med. 1999; 159: 1013.

18. Goldman L, Sayson R, Robbins S, Cohn LH, Bettmann M, Weisberg M. The value of the autopsy in three medical eras. N Engl J Med. 1983; 308: 1000-5.

19. Battle M, Pathak D, Humble CG, Key CR, Vanatta PR, Hill RB, et al. Factors influencing discrepancies between premortem and postmortem diagnoses. JAMA. 1987; 258: 339-44.

20. Mort TC, Yeston NS. The relationship of pre mortem diagnoses and post mortem findings in a surgical intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 1999; 27: 299-303.

21. Al-Saidi F, Díaz-Granados N, Messner H, Herridge M. Relationship between premortem and postmortem diagnosis in critically ill bone marrow transplantation patients. Crit Care Med. 2002; 30: 570-3.

22. Tai DY, El-Bilbeisi H, Tewari S, Mascha EJ, Wiedemann AP, Arroliga AC. A study of consecutive autopsies in a medical ICU. A comparison of clinical cause of death and autopsy diagnosis. Chest. 2001; 119: 530-6.

23. Twigg SJ, McCrirrick A, Sanderson PM. A comparison of post mortem findings with post hoc estimated clinical diagnoses of patients who die in a United Kingdom intensive care unit. Int Care Med. 2001; 27: 706-10.

24. Silfvast T, Takkunen O, Kolho E, Andersson LC, Rosenberg P. Characteristics of discrepancies between clinical and autopsy diagnoses in the intensive care unit: a 5 year review. Int Care Med. 2003; 29: 321-4.

25. Perkins GD, McAuley DF, Davies S, Gao F. Discrepancies between clinical and postmortem diagnoses in critically ill patients: an observational study. Crit Care. 2003; 7: 129-32.

26. Coombes A, Mokhtari M, Couvelard A, Trouillet J, Baudot J, Henin D, et al. Clinical and autopsy diagnoses in the intensive care unit. Arch Intern Med. 2004; 164: 389-92.

27. Tse GM, Lee JC. A twelve month review of autopsies performed at a university-affiliated teaching hospital in Hong Kong. HKMJ. 2000; 6: 190-4.

28. Coradazzi AL, Morganti AL, Montenegro MR. Discrepancies between clinical diagnoses and autopsy findings. Braz J Med Bio Res. 2003; 36: 385-91.

29. Gibson TN, Shirley SE, Escoffery CT, Reid M. Discrepancies between clinical and postmortem diagnoses in Jamaica: a study from the University Hospital of the West Indies. J Clin Pathol. 2004; 57: 980-5.

30. Grade MH, Zucoloto S, Kajiwara JK, Fernandez MT, Couto LG, García SB. Trends of accuracy of clinical diagnoses of the basic cause of death in a university hospital. J Clin Pathol. 2004; 57: 369-73.

31. Castellanos A, Ortíz F, Fuentes M. The evaluation of autopsy in the pediatric intensive unit. An Esp Pediatr. 1997; 46: 224-8.

32. Sunn CC, Alonzonzana G, Love JC. The value of autopsy in pediatric cardiology and cardiovascular surgery. Hum Pathol. 2003; 34: 491-6.

33. Newton D, Coffin CM, Clark EB. How the pediatric autopsy yields valuable information in a vertically integrated health care system. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2004; 128: 1239-46.

34. Ángeles A, Quintanilla L, Muñoz L, Espinoza B, Victoria P. Concordancia diagnóstica clínico-patológica en 429 autopsias del Instituto Nacional de la Nutrición Salvador Zubirán. Rev Inv Clin. 1992; 44: 13-20.

35. Rodríguez L, Sánchez MR, Medina G. La autopsia: la consulta final. Rev Biomed. 1997; 8: 171-96.