Cited by 23Emergency and Acute Care StudiesClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic SkillsHospital Admissions and Outcomes

Discrepancy between emergency department admission diagnosis and hospital discharge diagnosis and its impact on length of stay, up-triage to the intensive care unit, and mortality

Bastakoti, Manish, Muhailan, Mohamad, Nassar, Ahmad, Sallam, Tariq, Desale, Sameer, Fouda, Ragai, Ammar, Hussam, Cole, Carmella·2022·Diagnosis

Abstract

Objectives: Published discrepancy rates between emergency department (ED) and hospital discharge (HD) diagnoses vary widely (from 6.5 to 75.6%). The goal of this study was to determine the extent of diagnostic discrepancy and its impact on length of hospital stay (LOS), up-triage to the intensive care unit (ICU) and in-hospital mortality. Methods: A retrospective chart review of adult patients admitted from the ED to a hospitalist service at a tertiary hospital was performed. The ED and HD diagnoses were compared and classified as concordant, discordant, or symptom diagnoses according to predefined criteria. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine the associations of diagnostic discordance with in-hospital mortality and up-triage to the ICU. A linear regression model was used for the length of stay. Results: Of the 636 patients whose records were reviewed, 418 (217 [51.9%] women, with a mean age of 64.1 years) were included. Overall, 318 patients (76%) had concordant diagnoses, while 91 (21.77%) had discordant diagnoses. Only 9 patients (2.15%) had symptom diagnoses. A discordant diagnosis was associated with increased mortality (OR: 3.64; 95% CI: 1.026–12.91; p=0.045) and up-triage to the ICU (OR: 5.51; 95% CI: 2.43–12.5; p<0.001). The median LOS was significantly greater for patients with discordant diagnoses (7 days) than for those with concordant diagnoses (4.7 days) (p=0.004). Symptom diagnosis did not affect the mortality or ICU up-triage. Conclusions: One in five hospitalized patients had discordant HD and admission diagnoses. This diagnostic discrepancy was associated with significant impacts on patient morbidity and mortality.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1515/dx-2021-0001

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bastakoti, M., Muhailan, M., Nassar, A., Sallam, T., Desale, S., Fouda, R., Ammar, H., & Cole, C.
Affiliations
  • MedStar Washington Hospital Center (US)
  • MedStar Health Research Institute (US)
  • George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Ammar, Hussam
Venue
Diagnosis
Published
2021-07-05
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
107-114
ISSN
  • 2194-8011 (ISSN-L)
  • 2194-802X
OpenAlex
W3180465190
Cited by
23
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1
FWCI
4.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Diagnosis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Graduate Medical Education program at MedStar Washington Hospital Center
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Emergency and Acute Care Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Hospital Admissions and Outcomes
Keywords
diagnostic discordance, hospital discharge diagnoses, length of hospital stay, in-hospital mortality, symptom-based diagnosis, hospitalist care, emergency department discharge
MeSH terms
Adult, Emergency Service, Hospital, Female, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Length of Stay, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Discharge, Retrospective Studies, Triage, Tertiary Care Centers

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review