Identifying diagnostic errors in the emergency department using trigger-based strategies

Importance Diagnostic errors represent a major patient safety concern, with the potential to significantly impact patient outcomes. To address this, various trigger-based strategies have been developed to identify diagnostic errors, aiming to enhance clinical decision-making and improve patient safe...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Prashant Mahajan, Fernanda Bellolio, Daniel Cabrera, Kalyan Pasupathy, Todd Huschka, Mahsa Khalili, Moein Enayati, Shrinath Patel, Sarah J Parker
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMJ Publishing Group 2025-08-01
Series:BMJ Open Quality
Online Access:https://bmjopenquality.bmj.com/content/14/3/e003389.full
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849391084455591936
author Prashant Mahajan
Fernanda Bellolio
Daniel Cabrera
Kalyan Pasupathy
Todd Huschka
Mahsa Khalili
Moein Enayati
Shrinath Patel
Sarah J Parker
author_facet Prashant Mahajan
Fernanda Bellolio
Daniel Cabrera
Kalyan Pasupathy
Todd Huschka
Mahsa Khalili
Moein Enayati
Shrinath Patel
Sarah J Parker
author_sort Prashant Mahajan
collection DOAJ
description Importance Diagnostic errors represent a major patient safety concern, with the potential to significantly impact patient outcomes. To address this, various trigger-based strategies have been developed to identify diagnostic errors, aiming to enhance clinical decision-making and improve patient safety.Objective To evaluate the performance of three pre-established triggers (T) in the emergency department (ED) setting and assess their effectiveness in detecting diagnostic errors.Design Consecutive cohort, retrospective observational design.Setting Academic ED with 80 000 annual visits.Participants Adults and children presenting to a single ED in the USA between 1 May 2018 and 1 January 2020.Intervention/outcomes Electronic health records (EHRs) were retrieved and categorised into trigger-positive and trigger-negative cases using the following criteria: T1—unscheduled returnvisits to the ED with admission within 7–10 days of theinitial visit; T2—care escalation from the inpatient unitto the intensive care unit (ICU) within 6, 12 or 24 hoursof ED admission; and T3—all deaths in the ED or within24 hours of ED admission, excluding palliative care. A random sample of trigger-positive cases was reviewed using the SaferDx tool to determine the presence or absence of a diagnostic error.Results A total of 5791 trigger-positive and 118262 trigger-negative cases were identified. Among trigger-positive cases, 4159 (72%) were associated with T1, 1415 (24%) with T2, and 217 (4%) with T3. A preliminary chart review of 462 trigger-positive and 251 trigger-negative cases showed most were error-negative (279 and 217, respectively). Detailed reviews found 32 diagnostic errors among 183 trigger-positive cases, yielding PPVs of 5.4% (T1), 8.9% (T2), and 6.9% (T3). No errors were found in 34 reviewed trigger-negative cases, resulting in a 100% NPV. Sepsis was the most common diagnosis among error-positive cases (n=11, 34.4%). Those with non-specific chief complaints like altered mental status or shortness of breath had higher diagnostic error risk.Conclusion and relevance While previously proposed EHR-based triggers can identify some diagnostic errors, they are insufficient for detecting all cases. To improve error detection performance, we recommend exploring data-driven strategies, such as machine learning techniques, to more effectively identify underlying contributing factors to diagnostic errors and enhance detection accuracy in the ED.
format Article
id doaj-art-4d03b49a891a42a0b0d41d5cc87b2fd4
institution Kabale University
issn 2399-6641
language English
publishDate 2025-08-01
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format Article
series BMJ Open Quality
spelling doaj-art-4d03b49a891a42a0b0d41d5cc87b2fd42025-08-20T03:41:11ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open Quality2399-66412025-08-0114310.1136/bmjoq-2025-003389Identifying diagnostic errors in the emergency department using trigger-based strategiesPrashant Mahajan0Fernanda Bellolio1Daniel Cabrera2Kalyan Pasupathy3Todd Huschka4Mahsa Khalili5Moein Enayati6Shrinath Patel7Sarah J Parker8Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USADepartment of Emergency Medicine, Mayo Clinic Minnesota, Rochester, Minnesota, USADepartment of Emergency Medicine, Mayo Clinic Minnesota, Rochester, Minnesota, USAUniversity of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USAKern Center for the Science of Healthcare Delivery, Mayo Clinic Minnesota, Rochester, Minnesota, USADepartment of Emergency Medicine, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, CanadaKern Center for the Science of Healthcare Delivery, Mayo Clinic Minnesota, Rochester, Minnesota, USAKern Center for the Science of Healthcare Delivery, Mayo Clinic Minnesota, Rochester, Minnesota, USADepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USAImportance Diagnostic errors represent a major patient safety concern, with the potential to significantly impact patient outcomes. To address this, various trigger-based strategies have been developed to identify diagnostic errors, aiming to enhance clinical decision-making and improve patient safety.Objective To evaluate the performance of three pre-established triggers (T) in the emergency department (ED) setting and assess their effectiveness in detecting diagnostic errors.Design Consecutive cohort, retrospective observational design.Setting Academic ED with 80 000 annual visits.Participants Adults and children presenting to a single ED in the USA between 1 May 2018 and 1 January 2020.Intervention/outcomes Electronic health records (EHRs) were retrieved and categorised into trigger-positive and trigger-negative cases using the following criteria: T1—unscheduled returnvisits to the ED with admission within 7–10 days of theinitial visit; T2—care escalation from the inpatient unitto the intensive care unit (ICU) within 6, 12 or 24 hoursof ED admission; and T3—all deaths in the ED or within24 hours of ED admission, excluding palliative care. A random sample of trigger-positive cases was reviewed using the SaferDx tool to determine the presence or absence of a diagnostic error.Results A total of 5791 trigger-positive and 118262 trigger-negative cases were identified. Among trigger-positive cases, 4159 (72%) were associated with T1, 1415 (24%) with T2, and 217 (4%) with T3. A preliminary chart review of 462 trigger-positive and 251 trigger-negative cases showed most were error-negative (279 and 217, respectively). Detailed reviews found 32 diagnostic errors among 183 trigger-positive cases, yielding PPVs of 5.4% (T1), 8.9% (T2), and 6.9% (T3). No errors were found in 34 reviewed trigger-negative cases, resulting in a 100% NPV. Sepsis was the most common diagnosis among error-positive cases (n=11, 34.4%). Those with non-specific chief complaints like altered mental status or shortness of breath had higher diagnostic error risk.Conclusion and relevance While previously proposed EHR-based triggers can identify some diagnostic errors, they are insufficient for detecting all cases. To improve error detection performance, we recommend exploring data-driven strategies, such as machine learning techniques, to more effectively identify underlying contributing factors to diagnostic errors and enhance detection accuracy in the ED.https://bmjopenquality.bmj.com/content/14/3/e003389.full
spellingShingle Prashant Mahajan
Fernanda Bellolio
Daniel Cabrera
Kalyan Pasupathy
Todd Huschka
Mahsa Khalili
Moein Enayati
Shrinath Patel
Sarah J Parker
Identifying diagnostic errors in the emergency department using trigger-based strategies
BMJ Open Quality
title Identifying diagnostic errors in the emergency department using trigger-based strategies
title_full Identifying diagnostic errors in the emergency department using trigger-based strategies
title_fullStr Identifying diagnostic errors in the emergency department using trigger-based strategies
title_full_unstemmed Identifying diagnostic errors in the emergency department using trigger-based strategies
title_short Identifying diagnostic errors in the emergency department using trigger-based strategies
title_sort identifying diagnostic errors in the emergency department using trigger based strategies
url https://bmjopenquality.bmj.com/content/14/3/e003389.full
work_keys_str_mv AT prashantmahajan identifyingdiagnosticerrorsintheemergencydepartmentusingtriggerbasedstrategies
AT fernandabellolio identifyingdiagnosticerrorsintheemergencydepartmentusingtriggerbasedstrategies
AT danielcabrera identifyingdiagnosticerrorsintheemergencydepartmentusingtriggerbasedstrategies
AT kalyanpasupathy identifyingdiagnosticerrorsintheemergencydepartmentusingtriggerbasedstrategies
AT toddhuschka identifyingdiagnosticerrorsintheemergencydepartmentusingtriggerbasedstrategies
AT mahsakhalili identifyingdiagnosticerrorsintheemergencydepartmentusingtriggerbasedstrategies
AT moeinenayati identifyingdiagnosticerrorsintheemergencydepartmentusingtriggerbasedstrategies
AT shrinathpatel identifyingdiagnosticerrorsintheemergencydepartmentusingtriggerbasedstrategies
AT sarahjparker identifyingdiagnosticerrorsintheemergencydepartmentusingtriggerbasedstrategies