Is hospital autopsy auditing suitable for clinical risk management? Actualities and perspectives of auditing in the autopsy room following Italian Law 24/2017 on patient safety
| Autor: | Martina Montanaro, Diana Bonuccelli, Martina Zanon, Davide Radaelli, Eleonora Valentinuz, Alessandro Manfredi, Stefano D'Errico, Massimo Martelloni |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | Zanon, Martina, Valentinuz, Eleonora, Montanaro, Martina, Radaelli, Davide, Manfredi, Alessandro, Bonuccelli, Diana, Martelloni, Massimo, D'Errico, Stefano |
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2021 |
| Předmět: |
claim
medicine.medical_specialty Pharmaceutical Science Medical malpractice cause of death claims hospital autopsy performance quality risk management Context (language use) Autopsy Audit Patient safety Malpractice medicine Humans Diagnostic Errors Intensive care medicine Retrospective Studies Cause of death business.industry Retrospective cohort study Hospitals Italy Patient Safety business Biotechnology |
| Popis: | Background: Autopsy is a valuable tool for understanding the physiopathology of any disease, and it is the gold standard to assess the cause of death. The clinical autopsy is the ultimate medical service for a patient and plays a crucial role in the context of quality control, education of physicians and other medical personnel, as well as mitigation of risk of malpractice claims. Objective: This study aims to demonstrate the importance of improving an autopsy service and the relevance of this investigation procedure in daily clinical practice by evaluating the rate of major discrepancies between the assumed cause of death and the ascertained cause of death after a complete post mortem investigation. A further aim is to classify these discrepancies as class I or class II discrepancies according to the Goldman’s criteria in order to assess performance quality. Methods: A retrospective study of the hospital autopsies performed from June 2018 to March 2020 was conducted by considering a diversified dataset, including age and sex of the deceased as well as the clinical and pathological causes of death. Results: 362 cases were taken into consideration. Major discrepancies were found in 71.3% of cases, with a class I error of 22.7% and a class II error of 48.6%. The most frequent misdiagnosis were cardiovascular disorders, embolism, and aneurism rupture. Discussion: The rate of major discrepancies and the rate of class I and class II errors are way above the rate found in the literature. Despite the high rate of a major discrepancy, evidence collected from hospital autopsies (i.e., certainty of the cause of death, unknown comorbidities) has strengthened the legal defense in cases of medical malpractice litigation. In our experience, by accurately determining the cause of death, revealing new or unexpected findings, and any possible diagnostic or technical errors, post-mortem examinations can significantly contribute to the improvement of team performance and quality of care. Conclusion: The presence of clinicians during an autopsy and the early sharing of results can be considered a new auditing strategy for hard clinical cases. Finally, by providing a clearer understanding of the nature and cause of the illness, the autopsy results assist in the grieving process by reassuring family members that action or inaction on their part had not contributed to the death. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|