RESUMO
Background Clinico-pathological discrepancies are more frequent in settings in which limited diagnostic techniques are available, but there is little information on their actual impact. Aim We assessed the accuracy of the clinical diagnoses in a tertiary referral hospital in sub-Saharan Africa by comparison with post-mortem findings. We also identified potential risk factors for misdiagnoses. Methods One hundred and twelve complete autopsy procedures were performed at the Maputo Central Hospital (Mozambique), from November 2013 to March 2015. We reviewed the clinical records. Major clinico-pathological discrepancies were assessed using a modified version of the Goldman and Battle classification. Results Major diagnostic discrepancies were detected in 65/112 cases (58%) and were particularly frequent in infection-related deaths (56/80 [70%] major discrepancies). The sensitivity of the clinical diagnosis for toxoplasmosis was 0% (95% CI: 037), 18% (95% CI: 252) for invasive fungal infections, 25% (95% CI: 557) for bacterial sepsis, 34% (95% CI: 1657), for tuberculosis, and 46% (95% CI: 1975) for bacterial pneumonia. Major discrepancies were more frequent in HIV-positive than in HIV-negative patients (48/73 [66%] vs. 17/39 [44%]; p = 0.0236). Conclusions Major clinico-pathological discrepancies are still frequent in resource constrained settings. Increasing the level of suspicion for infectious diseases and expanding the availability of diagnostic tests could significantly improve the recognition of common life-threatening infections, and thereby reduce the mortality associated with these diseases. The high frequency of clinico-pathological discrepancies questions the validity of mortality reports based on clinical data or verbal autopsy.
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Doenças Transmissíveis/mortalidade , Causas de Morte , Erros de Diagnóstico/estatística & dados numéricos , Doenças Transmissíveis/diagnóstico , Centros de Atenção Terciária/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
The uncertainty about the real burden of causes of death (CoD) is increasingly recognized by the international health community as a critical limitation for prioritizing effective public health measures. The minimally invasive autopsy (MIA) has shown to be a satisfactory substitute of the complete diagnostic autopsy (CDA), the gold standard for CoD determination in low- and middle-income countries. However, more studies are needed to confirm its adequate performance in settings with different epidemiology. In this observational study, the CoD obtained with the MIA were compared with the clinical diagnosis and the results of the CDA in 61 deaths that occurred in an infectious diseases referral hospital in Manaus, Brazilian Amazon. Concordance between the categories of diseases obtained by the three methods was evaluated by the Kappa statistic. Additionally, we evaluated discrepancies between clinical and complete diagnostic autopsy diagnoses. The MIA showed a substantial concordance with the CDA (Kappa = 0.777, 95% CI 0.608-0.946), and a perfect or almost perfect coincidence in specific diagnosis (ICD-10 code) between MIA and CDA was observed in 85% of the cases. In contrast, the clinical diagnosis showed a fair concordance with the CDA (Kappa = 0.311, 95% CI 0.071-0.552). Major clinico-pathological discrepancies were identified in 49% of cases. In conclusion, the MIA showed a substantial performance for CoD identification. Clinico-pathological discrepancies remain high and justify the need for post-mortem studies, even in referral hospitals. The MIA is a robust substitute of the CDA for CoD surveillance and quality improvement of clinical practice in low- and middle-income settings.
Assuntos
Autopsia/métodos , Causas de Morte , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Brasil , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto JovemRESUMO
Background: The minimally invasive autopsy (MIA) is being investigated as an alternative to the complete diagnostic autopsy (CDA), gold standard for CoD determination, in settings where CDA is unfeasible and/or unacceptable. We aimed to explore healthcare providers' views and perceptions on theoretical and factual acceptability of the CDA and the MIA. Methods: A qualitative study, combining ethnographic and grounded-theory approaches, was conducted within a project aiming to validate the MIA tool against the CDA for CoD investigation. We present data on in-depth and semi-structured interviews of 33 healthcare providers operating within the formal and informal health services in Southern Mozambique. MIA perception was analysed through the theory of diffusion of innovations. Results: All participants considered CDA useful for CoD determination. CDA was perceived reliable, but the unpleasant nature of the procedure and its associated infection risk were the main perceived disadvantages. Participants considered the MIA simple, easy and quick to perform; likely to meet families' expectations to know the CoD, and able to provide evidence-based knowledge for disease management. Concerns were raised on its reliability compared to the CDA. Family's emotional status and accessibility to decision-makers were mentioned as principal barriers for MIA performance. The main jeopardizing factors for MIA implementation were the shortage of required resources and the significant proportion of people dying at home. Key facilitators for MIA acceptance included the need for the support from community and religious leaders, provision of clear information to the community, and accompaniment to bereaved families