Autopsy Data to Refine Healthcare Quality: A Fresh Perspective
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17140/PLMOJ-3-e004Abstract
The medical autopsy is an established quality assurance tool
that has laid the foundation for modern quality assurance and
improvement strategies.1 Previous studies have predominantly utilized
autopsy data to determine discordance rates among pre- and
post-mortem diagnoses and to identify pathologies at highest risk
of misdiagnosis. Examples of such work that has provided valuable
data to guide healthcare policy from around the world include
pre- and post-mortem discordance rates of 9.3% in India,2 12.3%
in Canada,3 17.2% in the USA,4 18.1% in the Netherlands,5 19.0%
in Greece,6 25.6% in Spain,7 28% in Brazil,8 and 48.4% in Jamaica.9
Although this area of work has contributed considerably to the
practice of diagnostic medicine, it is only beginning to scratch the
surface of the potential applications of autopsy data. New and innovative
strategies to apply autopsy data represent timely opportunities
to strengthen modern diagnostic processes. The purpose
of expanded applications of autopsy data is to inform targeted
strategies to recalibrate diagnostic methods and to mitigate factors
that contribute to diagnostic error in the evolving landscape of
modern healthcare.10
References
Seitzinger P, Rafid-Hamed Z, Kalra J (Jay). The Value of the Medi-cal Autopsy as a Quality Improvement Tool in Modern Diagnostic Medicine. New York, USA: Springer, Cham; 2020: 77-82.
Moorchung N, Singh V, Mishra A, Patrikar S, Kakkar S, Dutta V. Is necropsy obsolete - An audit of the clinical autopsy over six de-cades: A study from Indian sub continent. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. e2 2014; 56(4): 372-377. doi: 10.4103/0377-4929.125294
Kalra J, Markewich D, Seitzinger P. Quality assessment and management: An overview of concordance and discordance rates between clinical and autopsy diagnoses. In: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. NY, USA: Springer Verlag; 2020: 45-54.
Tavora F, Crowder CD, Sun C-C, Burke AP. Discrepancies be-tween clinical and autopsy diagnoses. Am J Clin Pathol. 2008; 129(1): 102-109. doi: 10.1309/9M7DFE62RTDKHH4D
Kuijpers CC, Fronczek J, Van De Goot FRW, Niessen HWM, Van Diest PJ, Jiwa M. The value of autopsies in the era of high-tech medicine: Discrepant findings persist. J Clin Pathol. 2014; 67(6): 512-519. doi: 10.1136/jclinpath-2013-202122
Spiliopoulou C, Papadodima S, Kotakidis N, Koutselinis A. Clin-ical diagnoses and autopsy findings: A retrospective analysis of 252 cases in Greece. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2005; 129(2): 210-214. doi: 10.1043/1543-2165(2005)129<210:CDAAFA>2.0.CO;2
Val-Bernal JF. El papel de la autopsia en la práctica clínica ac-tual. Med Clin (Barc). 2015; 145(7): 313-316. doi: 10.1016/j.med-cli.2015.02.015
Zerbini T, Singer JM, Leyton V. Evaluation of the discrepancy between clinical diagnostic hypotheses and anatomopathological diagnoses resulting from autopsies. Clinics (São Paulo, Brazil). 2019; 74(6): e1197. doi: 10.6061/clinics/2019/e1197
Shojania KG, Burton EC, McDonald KM, Goldman L. Changes in rates of autopsy-detected diagnostic errors over time. JAMA. 2003; 289(21): 2849-2856. doi: 10.1001/jama.289.21.2849
Kalra J, Adams S. Medical error and patient safety: Fostering a patient safety culture. Austin J Clin Pathol Open. 2016; 3(1): 1-3.
Kalra J, Rafid-Hamed Z, Seitzinger P. The future of diagnostic laboratory testing in healthcare. Am J Biomed Sci Res. 2019; 5(2): 89- 91. doi: 10.34297/AJBSR.2019.05.000883
Hendee WR, Becker GJ, Borgstede JP, Bosma J, Casarella WJ, Erickson BA, et al. Addressing overutilization in medical imaging. Radiology. 2010; 257(1): 240-245. doi: 10.1148/radiol.10100063
Saracci R. Is necropsy a valid monitor of clinical diagnosis performance? Br Med J. 1991; 303(6807): 898-900. doi: 10.1136/ bmj.303.6807.898
Sington JD, Cottrell BJ. Analysis of the sensitivity of death cer-tificates in 440 hospital deaths: A comparison with necropsy find-ings. J Clin Pathol. 2002; 55(7): 499-502. doi: 10.1136/jcp.55.7.499
Pinto Carvalho FL, Cordeiro JA, Cury PM. Clinical and patho-logical disagreement upon the cause of death in a teaching hospi-tal: Analysis of 100 autopsy cases in a prospective study. Pathol Int. 2008; 58(9): 568-571. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1827.2008.02272.x Kalra J et al Editorial | Volume 3 | Issue 1 | Pathol Lab Med Open J. 2020-2021; 3(1): e1-e3. doi: 10.17140/PLMOJ-3-e004
De Vlieger G, Mahieu E, Meersseman W. Clinical review: What is the role for autopsy in the ICU? Crit Care. 2010; 14(2): 221. doi: 10.1186/cc8925
Schwanda-Burger S, Moch H, Rg Muntwyler J, Salomon F. Di-agnostic errors in the new millennium: A follow-up autopsy study. Mod Pathol. 2012; 25: 777-783. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2011.199
Heriot GS, Pitman AG, Gonzales M, McKelvie P. The four horsemen: Clinicopathological correlation in 407 hospital au-topsies. Intern Med J. 2010; 40(9): 626-632. doi: 10.1111/j.1445- 5994.2009.01985.x Submit your article to this journal | https://openventio.org/submit-manuscript/ Editorial | Volume 3 | Issue 1 |
Redelmeier DA, Tversky A. Discrepancy between medical deci-sions for individual patients and for groups. N Engl J Med. 1990; 322(16): 1162-1164. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199004193221620
Clark BW, Derakhshan A, Desai S V. Diagnostic errors and the bedside clinical examination. Med Clin North Am. 2018; 102(3): 453-464. doi: 10.1016/j.mcna.2017.12.007
Goldman L. Autopsy 2018: Still necessary, even if occasionally not sufficient. Circulation. 2018; 137(25): 2686-2688. doi: 10.1161/ CIRCULATIONAHA.118.033236 Kalra J et al e3
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All content published in Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (PLM) is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows anyone to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the work — including for commercial purposes — provided appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and source.
