Abstract
Quality Assurance improves health care through detection of quality problems and feedback to the care giver. Current review procedures employed by the Peer Review Organizations (PROs), however, appear to under-detect quality problems, particularly those arising from diagnostic errors. We studied the use of an expert diagnostic system, Iliad, to detect quality problems arising from diagnostic errors. 100 cases were selected from among those Medicare cases reviewed by the Utah PRO (UPRO) and which contained diagnoses recognized by Iliad. Iliad flagged 28 cases out of the 100 as containing diagnostic errors, and a gold standard physician review confirmed quality problems in 17 cases (60.7%). The UPRO review found 28 cases with quality problems, mostly treatment and documentation errors. The quality problems detected by Iliad appeared to be more serious than those detected by the UPRO review. Among the six cases with quality problems detected by both the UPRO and Iliad review, there was none for which the same quality problem was detected by the two procedures. The two review procedures were therefore complementary.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Adams I. D., Chan M., Clifford P. C., Cooke W. M., Dallos V., de Dombal F. T., Edwards M. H., Hancock D. M., Hewett D. J., McIntyre N. Computer aided diagnosis of acute abdominal pain: a multicentre study. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1986 Sep 27;293(6550):800–804. doi: 10.1136/bmj.293.6550.800. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Anderson R. E., Hill R. B., Key C. R. The sensitivity and specificity of clinical diagnostics during five decades. Toward an understanding of necessary fallibility. JAMA. 1989 Mar 17;261(11):1610–1617. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Chassin M. R., Kosecoff J., Park R. E., Winslow C. M., Kahn K. L., Merrick N. J., Keesey J., Fink A., Solomon D. H., Brook R. H. Does inappropriate use explain geographic variations in the use of health care services? A study of three procedures. JAMA. 1987 Nov 13;258(18):2533–2537. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Donabedian A. Quality assessment and assurance: unity of purpose, diversity of means. Inquiry. 1988 Spring;25(1):173–192. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kassirer J. P., Kopelman R. I. Cognitive errors in diagnosis: instantiation, classification, and consequences. Am J Med. 1989 Apr;86(4):433–441. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(89)90342-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mercer J., Talbot I. C. Clinical diagnosis: a post-mortem assessment of accuracy in the 1980s. Postgrad Med J. 1985 Aug;61(718):713–716. doi: 10.1136/pgmj.61.718.713. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Moore S., Ryan C. P., Murphy R. A. PRO review. Part III: Quality review, intervention, and sanction. J Med Assoc Ga. 1989 Oct;78(10):683–688. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Murphy R. A., Williams T. W., Ryan C. P. Peer review in the 1990s. A look at the Georgia Medical Care Foundation. J Med Assoc Ga. 1989 Aug;78(8):549–551. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pelberg A. L. Missed myocardial infarction in the emergency room. Qual Assur Util Rev. 1989 May;4(2):39–42. doi: 10.1177/0885713x8900400203. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Weinberg N. S. The relation of medical problem solving and therapeutic errors to disease categories. QRB Qual Rev Bull. 1989 Sep;15(9):266–272. doi: 10.1016/s0097-5990(16)30303-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]