Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2013 Oct;22 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):ii40-ii51.
doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2013-001884. Epub 2013 Jul 13.

Use of health information technology to reduce diagnostic errors

Robert El-Kareh  1 , Omar Hasan, Gordon D Schiff
Affiliations
Free PMC article
Review

Use of health information technology to reduce diagnostic errors

Robert El-Kareh et al. BMJ Qual Saf. 2013 Oct.
Free PMC article

Abstract

Background: Health information technology (HIT) systems have the potential to reduce delayed, missed or incorrect diagnoses. We describe and classify the current state of diagnostic HIT and identify future research directions.

Methods: A multi-pronged literature search was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, backwards and forwards reference searches and contributions from domain experts. We included HIT systems evaluated in clinical and experimental settings as well as previous reviews, and excluded radiology computer-aided diagnosis, monitor alerts and alarms, and studies focused on disease staging and prognosis. Articles were organised within a conceptual framework of the diagnostic process and areas requiring further investigation were identified.

Results: HIT approaches, tools and algorithms were identified and organised into 10 categories related to those assisting: (1) information gathering; (2) information organisation and display; (3) differential diagnosis generation; (4) weighing of diagnoses; (5) generation of diagnostic plan; (6) access to diagnostic reference information; (7) facilitating follow-up; (8) screening for early detection in asymptomatic patients; (9) collaborative diagnosis; and (10) facilitating diagnostic feedback to clinicians. We found many studies characterising potential interventions, but relatively few evaluating the interventions in actual clinical settings and even fewer demonstrating clinical impact.

Conclusions: Diagnostic HIT research is still in its early stages with few demonstrations of measurable clinical impact. Future efforts need to focus on: (1) improving methods and criteria for measurement of the diagnostic process using electronic data; (2) better usability and interfaces in electronic health records; (3) more meaningful incorporation of evidence-based diagnostic protocols within clinical workflows; and (4) systematic feedback of diagnostic performance.

Keywords: Diagnostic errors; clinical decision support systems; clinical informatics; health information technology; patient safety.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Model of diagnostic process with Diagnosis Error Evaluation and Research (DEER) categories of potential errors.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Diagnosis Error Evaluation and Research (DEER) taxonomy.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Main types of diagnostic health information technology (HIT) tools and steps in diagnosis targeted by each type.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Schiff GD, Kim S, Abrams R, et al. Diagnosing Diagnosis Errors: Lessons from a Multi-institutional Collaborative Project and Methodology. 2005 - PubMed
    1. Berner ES, Graber ML. Overconfidence as a cause of diagnostic error in medicine. Am J Med 2008;121(5 Suppl Diagnostic Error in Medicine):S2–23 - PubMed
    1. Newman-Toker DE, Pronovost PJ. Diagnostic errors: the next frontier for patient safety. JAMA 2009;301:1060–2 - PubMed
    1. Schwartz WB. Medicine and the computer. N Engl J Med 1970;283:1257–64 - PubMed
    1. Schwartz WB, Patil RS, Szolovits P. Artificial intelligence in medicine. Where do we stand? N Engl J Med 1987;316: 685–8 - PubMed