[No SPF Record] Re: [IMPROVEDX] Transfers/referrals

Peggy Zuckerman peggyzuckerman at GMAIL.COM
Tue Jan 9 00:37:54 UTC 2018


Re 'standard errors' and laboratory and radiology errors.  Assuming that
you can separate out the unnecessary lab and imaging errors which are
duplicative, would not most of the errors from them be mis-reads, which
would seem to be diagnostic in nature?

Case in point; patient a history of prostate cancer and early leukemia, has
a bowel blockage>  THe blockage is resolved, and the patient is given a
general body CT.  From that he is told that he pancreatic cancer which is
wide spread, and that he needs chemo immediately, and no time for a second
opinion, which he requests.  A quick trip to a larger center, with a second
CT scan, he is shown to have no cancer, nothing wrong with the pancreas.

Happy news, but back to the first hospital, where he asks the obvious, and
is told the reason for the (diagnostic or standard?) error is, "Our
equipment is old".

Peggy

Peggy Zuckerman
www.peggyRCC.com

On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 3:01 PM, Harry Burke <harry.burke at gmail.com> wrote:

> The incidence depends on how you define diagnostic errors and how you
> detect diagnostic errors.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 8, 2018, at 5:43 PM, Rory Jaffe <rjaffe at CHPSO.ORG> wrote:
>
> There are no reliable estimates of the incidence of diagnostic errors.
>
>
>
> Rory
>
>
>
> *From:* robert bell [mailto:0000000296e45ec4-dmarc-request at LIST.
> IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
> <0000000296e45ec4-dmarc-request at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG>]
> *Sent:* Sunday, January 07, 2018 10:58 AM
> *To:* IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
> *Subject:* [No SPF Record] Re: [IMPROVEDX] Transfers/referrals
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> It is said that of the errors in medicine two thirds are standard errors
> while one third are diagnostic (does anyone know where those figures came
> from?).
>
>
>
> It this is true then the next question would seem to be what is the impact
> of standard errors (from computers, hand offs, medication, laboratory and
> radiology errors, etc., etc.) on diagnostic errors. Is it a  small of large
> figure? Are there  any estimates?
>
>
>
> Then the question arises should we as a community/organization be dealing
> in someway with *all* errors and not solely diagnostic.
>
>
>
> In fact, if the standard errors significantly effect diagnoses, will we be
> able to easily prove that any diagnostic approach is worthwhile?
>
>
>
> Will historical analyses work? How would you compensate for standard error
> rates being different in different hospitals and HC facilities.
>
>
>
> Do we need to know the level of effect of standard errors on diagnostic
> errors in different facilities?
>
>
>
> Robert Bell, M.D.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> To unsubscribe from IMPROVEDX: click the following link:
> http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?
> SUBED1=IMPROVEDX&A=1
>
> or send email to: IMPROVEDX-SIGNOFF-REQUEST at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
>
>
>
> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, Society for Improving Diagnosis in
> Medicine
>
> To learn more about SIDM visit:
> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> To unsubscribe from IMPROVEDX: click the following link:
> http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?
> SUBED1=IMPROVEDX&A=1 or send email to: IMPROVEDX-SIGNOFF-REQUEST@
> LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
>
> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, Society for Improving Diagnosis in
> Medicine
>
> To learn more about SIDM visit:
> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/
>






Moderator: David Meyers, Board Member, Society to Improve Diagnosis in Medicine

To unsubscribe from the IMPROVEDX list, click the following link:<br>
<a href="http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBED1=IMPROVEDX&A=1" target="_blank">http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBED1=IMPROVEDX&A=1</a>
</p>

HTML Version:
URL: <../attachments/20180108/88ce16a4/attachment.html>


More information about the Test mailing list