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
. 2022 Sep 13:15:7209-7217.
doi: 10.2147/IJGM.S378146. eCollection 2022.

Outcomes of General Internal Medicine Consultations for Diagnosis from Specialists in a Tertiary Hospital: A Retrospective Observational Study

Masashi Yokose  1 , Yukinori Harada  1 , Shogo Hanai  1 , Shusaku Tomiyama  1 , Taro Shimizu  1
Affiliations

Outcomes of General Internal Medicine Consultations for Diagnosis from Specialists in a Tertiary Hospital: A Retrospective Observational Study

Masashi Yokose et al. Int J Gen Med. .

Abstract

Purpose: The data on the diagnostic contribution of general internal medicine (GIM) consultations for undiagnosed health problems from specialists are scarce. This study aims to explore the role of generalists as diagnostic medicine consultants in tertiary care settings.

Patients and methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study at a Japanese university hospital. GIM consultations for diagnosis from other departments on outpatients aged ≧ 20 years from January 2018 to December 2020 were included. Data were extracted from electronic medical records. The primary outcome was new diagnosis rates. The secondary outcomes were new diagnosis rates with clinical significance and clinical outcomes at 90 days from the index visit.

Results: A total of 328 patients were included. The top five consulting departments were orthopedics (17.0%), cardiovascular (10.3%), otorhinolaryngology (8.8%), neurology (8.8%), and gastroenterology (7.9%). GIM identified 456 chief complaints (CCs), and the top five were fever (10.9%), abnormal laboratory results (8.3%), fatigue (5.9%), and pain (7.4%) or numbness (4.6%) in the extremities. There were 139 (104/328 patients: 31.8%) specialty consultations from GIM, and the top five departments were rheumatology (21.1%), gastroenterology (19.2%), orthopedics (9.6%), psychiatry (9.6%), and neurology (9.6%). In total, 277 new diagnoses were established in 232 patients (70.7%), and 203 patients had new diagnoses with clinical significance (61.8%). Clinical outcomes at 90 days from the time of the index visit were resolution/improvement (60.7%), unchanged/worsened (22.3%), and unknown (17.0%).

Conclusion: Over 70% of GIM consultations from other departments established new diagnoses with favorable outcomes in >60% of the patients.

Keywords: consultation; diagnostic error; diagnostic excellence; diagnostic uncertainty; specialists.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Dr Yukinori Harada reports personal fees from PRECISION, Inc., outside the submitted work. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart of this study.
Figure 2
Figure 2
International Classification of Diseases-10 categories of new diagnoses. Horizontal axis is the number of diagnoses.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. ACP. General internal medicine career path information. Available from: https://www.acponline.org/about-acp/about-internal-medicine/general-inte.... Accessed January 11, 2022.
    1. Akbari A, Mayhew A, Al-Alawi MA, et al. Interventions to improve outpatient referrals from primary care to secondary care. Cochrane effective practice and organisation of care group. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD005471.pub2 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Franks P, Clancy CM, Nutting PA. Gatekeeping revisited--protecting patients from overtreatment. N Engl J Med. 1992;327(6):424–429. doi:10.1056/NEJM199208063270613 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hashem A, Chi MTH, Friedman CP. Medical errors as a result of specialization. J Biomed Inform. 2003;36(1–2):61–69. doi:10.1016/S1532-0464(03)00057-1 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Committee on Diagnostic Error in Health Care, Board on Health Care Services, Institute of Medicine, The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. In: Balogh EP, Miller BT, Ball JR, eds. Improving Diagnosis in Health Care. National Academies Press; 2015:21794. doi:10.17226/21794 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources