Feasibility of a rapid diagnosis discussion tool for reducing misdiagnosis of patients presenting to emergency departments with abdominal pain

Abstract

Objectives: Providing accurate and timely diagnoses is challenging in ED settings. We evaluated the feasibility and effectiveness of a short, structured rapid diagnosis discussion (RaDD) between a patient's initial doctor and a second doctor for patients presenting to ED with abdominal pain.

Methods: Controlled pre-post, mixed-methods pilot study in a metropolitan hospital network in Melbourne, Australia. Comparisons were made between an ED using RaDD for a 1-month period (n = 155) and two control EDs within the same hospital network (n = 2227) using standard practices. A short survey of 27 clinicians was also undertaken.

Results: Provisional diagnoses changed in 24.7% (95% confidence interval 19.0, 30.4) of all cases for which a RaDD case report sheet was completed, and clinicians' confidence in their decision-making was significantly higher when using RaDD (r = 0.27). RaDD significantly increased the likelihood that patients would be sent to the short stay unit and have a blood test ordered, and significantly reduced the likelihood that patients would be discharged home from the ED or leave at their own risk. Usage of the RaDD tool was low (25.2% of eligible cases), and qualitative feedback indicated that time limitations inhibited uptake.

Conclusions: RaDD encouraged clinicians to take a more cautious, risk-averse approach to care and improved confidence in their diagnostic decisions. However, cost effectiveness of these outcomes and possible implementation barriers need to be further considered in subsequent studies.

Keywords: cognitive bias; emergency departments; misdiagnosis; structured discussion.