4.5 Article

Using simulation to identify sources of medical diagnostic error in child physical abuse

期刊

CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT
卷 52, 期 -, 页码 62-69

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.12.015

关键词

Child physical abuse; Medical diagnosis of abuse; Medical Simulation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Little is known regarding sources of diagnostic error at the provider level in cases of possible child physical abuse. This study examines medical diagnosis as part of medical management and not as part of legal investigation. Simulation offers the opportunity to evaluate diagnostic accuracy and identify error sources. We aimed to identify sources of medical diagnostic error in cases of possible abuse by assessing diagnostic accuracy, identifying gaps in evaluation, and characterizing information used by medical providers to reach their diagnoses. Eight femur fracture simulation cases, half of which were abuse and half accident, were created. Providers from a tertiary pediatric emergency department participated in a simulation exercise involving 1 of the 8 cases. Performance was evaluated using structured scoring tools and debriefing, and qualitative analysis characterized participants' rationales for their diagnoses. Overall, 39% of the 43 participants made an incorrect diagnosis regarding abuse. An incorrect diagnosis was over 8 times more likely to occur in accident than in abuse cases (OR = 8.8; 95% CI 2 to 39). Only 58% of participants correctly identified the fracture morphology, 60% correctly identified the mechanics necessary to generate the morphology, and 30% of ordered all appropriate tests for occult injury. In misdiagnoses, participants frequently falsely believed the injury did not match the proposed mechanism and the history provided by the caregiver had changed. Education programs targeting the identified error sources may result in fewer diagnostic errors and improve outcomes. The findings also support the need for referral to child abuse experts in many cases. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据