Patient safety/original researchMissed and Delayed Diagnoses in the Emergency Department: A Study of Closed Malpractice Claims From 4 Liability Insurers
Introduction
Medical error continues to capture the attention of the medical profession, policymakers, and the public.1 Inpatient care has been the major focus of attention, but there is increasing recognition of the risks of iatrogenic harm in the outpatient setting, including the emergency department (ED).2, 3, 4, 5 Diagnostic errors are of particular concern and throughout the last decade have become the most prevalent type of malpractice claim in the United States.2, 6, 7
The ED is an especially challenging environment in which to consistently make accurate and timely diagnoses. Patients often present with high-acuity illness, elevating the stakes from the outset.8 Triage, consultations, admissions, discharge, and other steps in emergency care are operationally complex and must usually be executed under tight time constraints. Emergency physicians seldom have a continuous relationship with the patients they treat, and the continuous nature of an ED necessitates a perpetual cycle of shift changes and handoffs.8, 9 Supervision needs are high because trainees with widely varying clinical backgrounds and skills participate in care delivery. These intrinsic pressures of emergency care are amplified by crowding10, 11, 12 and increasing utilization by uninsured patients.13
Previous studies of missed diagnoses in the ED have focused on specific diagnoses or used epidemiologic methods to identify clinical risk factors.8, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 However, little is known about the system-of-care factors that lead to diagnostic errors. Medical malpractice claims files present a potentially valuable source of information. They often involve severe injuries; they represent a powerful catchment point for information on errors; and by drawing together documentation from both formal legal inquiries and confidential internal investigations, they present a substantially richer body of information about the antecedents of medical injury than the medical record alone. Several clinical areas,2, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 most notably anesthesiology,26 have made impressive use of malpractice claims file analysis.
We analyzed a sample of medical malpractice claims involving allegations of misdiagnosis in the ED. The study goal was to determine specifically where breakdowns in the diagnostic process occurred and what contributing factors (systems, cognitive, and patient-related) played a role in their occurrence. Such descriptive information may help to identify priority areas for interventions to enhance safety in the ED.
Section snippets
Materials and methods
Four malpractice insurance companies based in 3 regions in the United States (northeast, southwest, and west) participated in the study. Collectively, the insurers covered approximately 21,000 physicians, 46 acute care hospitals (20 academic and 26 nonacademic), and 390 outpatient facilities. Institutional review boards at the investigators’ institutions and at each review site approved the study.
Data were extracted from random samples of closed malpractice claims files at each insurer. The
Results
One hundred twenty-two of the claims alleged diagnostic error in the ED. The claims alleged injuries sustained between 1979 and 2001. All the claims were closed between 1984 and 2003. In 80% of the claims, the alleged diagnostic error occurred in 1990 or later, and in 46%, it occurred in 1994 or later.
In 3% (4/122) of the claims, no adverse outcome or change in the patient’s clinical course was evident. Thirty-two percent (39/122) of the claims contained an adverse outcome but no error. The
Limitations
The use of malpractice claims for addressing patient safety has limitations. First, severe injuries are probably overrepresented because they are more likely to trigger litigation. Second, certain breakdowns or contributing factors may not have been discernible in claims file review, even though they played a role; to the extent that this occurred, the prevalence findings for such estimates will be lower bounds, and the multifactorial causality we observed probably understates the true
Discussion
By reviewing malpractice claims files related to care in the ED, this study identified 79 missed diagnoses that varied widely in type, often involved acute illnesses, and frequently resulted in severe injury. The cause of these events was complex, with the majority involving multiple breakdowns in the diagnostic process, several contributing factors, and more than 1 provider. The most common breakdown points were test ordering and interpretation, performance of the medical history and physical
References (70)
- et al.
Errors in a busy emergency department
Ann Emerg Med
(2003) Circadian rhythm, shift work, and emergency medicine
Ann Emerg Med
(2001)- et al.
Missed diagnoses of acute myocardial infarction in the emergency department: results from a multicenter study
Ann Emerg Med
(1993) - et al.
Community-acquired pneumonia in the emergency department: a practical approach to diagnosis and management
Emerg Med Clin North Am
(2003) - et al.
Value of radiograph audit in an accident service department
Injury
(1992) - et al.
Patient reminder letters to promote annual mammograms: a randomized controlled trial
Prev Med
(2000) - et al.
Litigation against the emergency physician: common features in cases of missed myocardial infarction
Ann Emerg Med
(1989) - et al.
Human factors and ergonomics in the emergency department
Ann Emerg Med
(2002) - et al.
Ten commandments for effective clinical decision support: making the practice of evidence-based medicine a reality
J Am Med Inform Assoc
(2003) - et al.
The effect of a computerized reminder system on the prevention of postoperative venous thromboembolism
Chest
(2004)
Overcrowding in the nation’s emergency departments: complex causes and disturbing effects
Ann Emerg Med
Some unintended consequences of information technology in health care: the nature of patient care information system-related errors
J Am Med Inform Assoc
Improving patient safety: five years after the IOM report
N Engl J Med
Learning from malpractice claims about negligent, adverse events in primary care in the United States
Qual Saf Health Care
Adverse drug events in ambulatory care
N Engl J Med
Incidence and types of adverse events and negligent care in Utah and Colorado
Med Care
Errors in emergency medicine: a call to action
Acad Emerg Med
The growth of physician medical malpractice payments: evidence from the national practitioner data bank
Health Aff (Millwood)
Epidemiology and etiology of malpractice lawsuits involving children in US emergency departments and urgent care centers
Pediatr Emerg Care
A conceptual model of emergency department crowding
Ann Emerg Med
Frequent overcrowding in U.S. emergency departments
Ann Emerg Med
Emergency department overcrowding in the United States: an emerging threat to patient safety and public health
Emerg Med J
Who walks through the door?the effect of the uninsured on hospital use
Health Aff (Millwood)
Missed diagnoses of acute cardiac ischemia in the emergency department
N Engl J Med
Reducing errors made by emergency physicians in interpreting radiographs: longitudinal study
BMJ
False-negative and false-positive errors in abdominal pain evaluation: failure to diagnose acute appendicitis and unnecessary surgery
Acad Emerg Med
Malpractice in the emergency room: a critical review of undiagnosed appendicitis cases and legal actions
Qual Assur Util Rev
A description of emergency department-related malpractice claims in The Netherlands: closed claims study 1993-2001
Eur J Emerg Med
Learning from primary care malpractice: past, present and future
Qual Saf Health Care
Malpractice claims data as a quality improvement tool, I: epidemiology of error in four specialties
JAMA
Malpractice claims data as a quality improvement tool, II: is targeting effective?
JAMA
The American Society of Anesthesiologists Closed Claims Project: what have we learned, how has it affected practice, and how will it affect practice in the future?
Anesthesiology
A Measure of Malpractice: Medical Injury, Malpractice Litigation, and Patient Compensation
Beyond dead reckoning: measures of medical injury burden, malpractice litigation, and alternative compensation models from Utah and Colorado
Indiana Law Rev
Cited by (356)
The AHRQ Report on Diagnostic Errors in the Emergency Department: The Wrong Answer to the Wrong Question
2023, Annals of Emergency MedicineAssociation Between Emergency Physician's Age and Mortality of Medicare Patients Aged 65 to 89 Years After Emergency Department Visit
2023, Annals of Emergency MedicineAnesthesiology Patient Handoff Education Interventions: A Systematic Review
2023, Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient SafetyArtificial intelligence diagnostic model for multi-site fracture X-ray images of extremities based on deep convolutional neural networks
2024, Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery
Supervising editor: Robert L. Wears, MD, MS
Authors contributions: TAB and DMS conceived the study and obtained funding. AK, TKG, and DMS designed this analysis. TKG, ALP, EJT, and DMS designed the data collection instruments. AK, TKG, ALP, EJT, and DMS trained physician reviewers. TAB and DMS undertook recruitment of participating sites. ALP, CY, and DMS managed the data collection, including quality control. RG contributed to quality control efforts after the data had been collected. AK, TKG, CY, and DMS analyzed the data. AK, TKG, and DMS drafted the article, and all authors contributed substantially to revision of its intellectual content. AK, TKG, and DMS take responsibility for the paper as a whole.
Funding and support: This study was supported by grants from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (HS011886-03) and the Harvard Risk Management Foundation. Dr. Studdert was also supported by grant KO2HS11285 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
Reprints not available from the authors.
Publication dates: Available online December 1, 2006.