Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England) · 2023
Misdiagnosis in multiple sclerosis in a Brazilian reference center: Clinical, radiological, laboratory profile and failures in the diagnostic process-Cohort study.
Наблюдательное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tieppo Eduardo Macedo de Souza, Silva Guilherme Diogo, Silva Tomás Fraga Ferreira da, Araujo Roger Santana de, Oliveira Mateus Boaventura de, Spricigo Mariana Gondim Peixoto, Pimentel Gabriela Almeida, Campana Igor Gusmão, Castrillo Bruno Batitucci, Mendes Natalia Trombini, Teixeira Larissa Silva, Nunes Douglas Mendes, Rimkus Carolina de Medeiros, Adoni Tarso, Apóstolos Pereira Samira Luisa, Callegaro Dagoberto
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Multiple sclerosis misdiagnosis remains a problem despite the well-validated McDonald 2017. For proper evaluation of errors in the diagnostic process that lead to misdiagnosis, it is adequate to incorporate patients who are already under regular follow-up at reference centers of demyelinating diseases.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate multiple sclerosis misdiagnosis in patients who are on follow-up at a reference center of demyelinating diseases in Brazil.
METHODS: We designed an observational study including patients in regular follow-up, who were diagnosed with multiple sclerosis at our specialized outpatient clinic in the Hospital of Clinics in the University of Sao Paulo, from 1996 to 2021, and were reassessed for misdiagnosis in 2022. We evaluated demographic information, clinical profile, and complementary exams and classified participants as "established multiple sclerosis," "non-multiple sclerosis, diagnosed," and "non-multiple sclerosis, undiagnosed." Failures in the diagnostic process were assessed by the modified Diagnostic Error Evaluation and Research tool.
RESULTS: A total of 201 patients were included. After analysis, 191/201 (95.02%) participants were confirmed as "established multiple sclerosis," 5/201 (2.49%) were defined as "non-multiple sclerosis, diagnosed," and 5/201 (2.49%) were defined as "non-multiple sclerosis, undiagnosed."
CONCLUSIONS: Multiple sclerosis misdiagnosis persists in reference centers, emphasizing the need for careful interpretation of clinical findings to prevent errors.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate multiple sclerosis misdiagnosis in patients who are on follow-up at a reference center of demyelinating diseases in Brazil.
METHODS: We designed an observational study including patients in regular follow-up, who were diagnosed with multiple sclerosis at our specialized outpatient clinic in the Hospital of Clinics in the University of Sao Paulo, from 1996 to 2021, and were reassessed for misdiagnosis in 2022. We evaluated demographic information, clinical profile, and complementary exams and classified participants as "established multiple sclerosis," "non-multiple sclerosis, diagnosed," and "non-multiple sclerosis, undiagnosed." Failures in the diagnostic process were assessed by the modified Diagnostic Error Evaluation and Research tool.
RESULTS: A total of 201 patients were included. After analysis, 191/201 (95.02%) participants were confirmed as "established multiple sclerosis," 5/201 (2.49%) were defined as "non-multiple sclerosis, diagnosed," and 5/201 (2.49%) were defined as "non-multiple sclerosis, undiagnosed."
CONCLUSIONS: Multiple sclerosis misdiagnosis persists in reference centers, emphasizing the need for careful interpretation of clinical findings to prevent errors.