Skip to main content
Public Health Reports logoLink to Public Health Reports
. 1996 May-Jun;111(3):251–255.

Tuberculosis surveillance using death certificate data, New York City, 1992.

R M Washko 1, T R Frieden 1
PMCID: PMC1381768  PMID: 8643817

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. To determine the accuracy and frequency of reporting tuberculosis as either the contributing or underlying cause of death on death certificates in New York City during 1992. METHODS. Death certificates from 1992 that listed tuberculosis were matched with the New York City tuberculosis registry. For those persons who had tuberculosis listed as a cause of death, but who were not listed in the registry, medical records were reviewed. The frequency of reporting tuberculosis on death certificates in patients who died with active tuberculosis was evaluated in the second part of this study. Death certificates of patients with active tuberculosis (persons who died within six months of starting anti-tuberculosis medications) in 1992 were reviewed. RESULTS. Tuberculosis was listed on 635 death certificates; 377 (59%) were confirmed cases based on registry data. Reviews of medical records were possible for 230 (89%) of the remaining 258 patients and confirmed only two additional tuberculosis cases. Of 310 persons who died with active tuberculosis in 1992 (second part of the study), only 104 (34%) had tuberculosis listed on their death certificates. CONCLUSIONS. In New York City, a diagnosis of tuberculosis on death certificates is an inaccurate measure of tuberculosis burden.

Full text

PDF
253

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Battle R. M., Pathak D., Humble C. G., Key C. R., Vanatta P. R., Hill R. B., Anderson R. E. Factors influencing discrepancies between premortem and postmortem diagnoses. JAMA. 1987 Jul 17;258(3):339–344. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Cameron H. M., McGoogan E. A prospective study of 1152 hospital autopsies: I. Inaccuracies in death certification. J Pathol. 1981 Apr;133(4):273–283. doi: 10.1002/path.1711330402. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Carvalho F. M., Widmer M. R., Cruz M., Palomo V., Cruz C. Clinical diagnosis versus autopsy. Bull Pan Am Health Organ. 1991;25(1):41–46. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Mathur P., Sacks L., Auten G., Sall R., Levy C., Gordin F. Delayed diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis in city hospitals. Arch Intern Med. 1994 Feb 14;154(3):306–310. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Rieder H. L., Kelly G. D., Bloch A. B., Cauthen G. M., Snider D. E., Jr Tuberculosis diagnosed at death in the United States. Chest. 1991 Sep;100(3):678–681. doi: 10.1378/chest.100.3.678. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Ron E., Carter R., Jablon S., Mabuchi K. Agreement between death certificate and autopsy diagnoses among atomic bomb survivors. Epidemiology. 1994 Jan;5(1):48–56. doi: 10.1097/00001648-199401000-00009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Zumwalt R. E., Ritter M. R. Incorrect death certification. An invitation to obfuscation. Postgrad Med. 1987 Jun;81(8):245-7, 250, 253-4. doi: 10.1080/00325481.1987.11699876. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Public Health Reports are provided here courtesy of SAGE Publications

RESOURCES