310 likes | 322 Views
This case study explores documentation accuracy of cause of death on death certificates in Ghana. It highlights errors, frequencies, and recommendations for improvement. The study aims to provide feedback to clinicians for better practice.
E N D
Cause of death documentation, are we getting it right? A case study of cause of death documentation available from death certificates in a teaching hospital in Ghana. Ruth Owusu MGCP, Dennis Laryea MGCP, Collins Frimpong MGCP, Joshua Arthur MPH
Outline • Introduction • Methods • Results • Discussion • Recommendations • Acknowledgements • References
Introduction • The most effective public health intervention to prevent death, is to prevent the underlying cause of death (UCOD) from occurring. • Accurate and reliable information on UCOD needed for policymakers/health authorities to implement interventions to decrease morbidity and mortality. • Are we providing policymakers with accurate and reliable statistics on the underlying causes of death (UCOD)?
Introduction • The Underlying Cause of Death (UCOD) is: • “(a) the disease or injury which initiated the train of morbid events leading directly to death, or (b) the circumstances of the accident or violence which produced the fatal injury”.(WHO,2010) • Etiologically specific, • Excludes mechanisms/mode of dying
Introduction • Concept of UCOD not well appreciated by clinicians • Immediate cause of death (ICOD) better appreciated by clinicians • Why UCOD? • primary tabulation of national mortality data • international comparisons • Most effective Public Health intervention
Introduction • Death certificates are main source of cause of death information globally • The “cause of death” section of the death certificate is designed to point out: • Immediate cause of death • Sequence from the underlying cause of death to the immediate cause of death • Any other conditions not directly leading to death but contributing to death • Duration of the reported conditions.
Introduction International form of medical certificate of death
Introduction • UCOD should be entered on the lowest used line of Part I • UCOD is selected and coded using ICD-10 (usually by non-clinicians) • Accurate and complete filling of death certificate by clinicians will facilitate the selection of the underlying cause of death.
Introduction • Routine mortality surveillance in KATH revealed common errors in death certificate completion. • To help provide feedback to clinicians to improve practice we set out to: • Document some errors of completion of death certificates likely to affect accurate selection of UCOD • Assess frequencies of these errors • Make recommendations towards improving accurate filling of death certificates
Methods • Study site: KomfoAnokye Teaching Hospital (1,300-bed tertiary facility) • A retrospective review of mortality surveillance data in 2015 (4583 deaths) • Excluded neonatal deaths (771) • Systematic sampling done to select 510 out of 3812 deaths • Data entered and analyzed with Epi Info 7 • Four types of errors of DC completion pre-specified for analysis
Methods • Pre-specified errors of completion: • Sequencing error (illogical cause of death sequence) • Mechanism of death/non-specific causes of death without acceptable underlying cause of death • Two or more competing underlying causes listed • Underlying cause of death placed in Part II • Pre-specified errors were determined by 2 physicians and if no agreement, a third physician brought in.
Methods • Did not assess diagnostic accuracy of the cause of death by attending clinician. • Did not include death certificates from pathologists or coroner
Methods: Did not assess errors such as: • wrong/ non-standard abbreviations • time intervals not recorded (approximate interval between presumed onset and date of death for each condition listed in Part I) • Inadequate level of detail on condition
Results • 344(67.5%) out of 510 deaths had death certificates completed by attending clinicians. • Out of 344, 56 (16.3%) had illogical cause-of-death causal sequence (sequencing error) • 53 (15.4 %) had mechanism of death/non-specific causes listed without an acceptable underlying cause of death, • 37 (10.8 %) had underlying cause of death placed in part II of the death certificate. • 16 (4.7 %) had two or more competing causes listed • In all, 126 ( 36.6%) had at least one of the 4 types of error
Results: Sequencing error Example 1 I a) Hepatic encephalopathy I b) lobar pneumonia Example 2: I a) Pulmonary Tuberculosis I b) Cerebral toxoplasmosis
Results: Sequencing error Example 3 I a) Extrapulmonary TB I b) Electrolyte imbalance Example 4 I a) Presumed stage 4 Retroviral Infection I b) Severe acute malnutrition
Results: Mechanism of death/non-specific causes Example 1 I a) Cardiogenic shock I b) Heart failure Example 2: I a) Biventricular failure I a) Respiratory failure Example 3: I a) Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome
Results: Mechanism of death/Non-specific causes: Example 4: I a) Septic shock Example 5: I a) Acute-on-chronic kidney disease I b) Uraemic encephalopathy
Results: Two or more competing causes Example 1 I a) Diabetic nephropathy I b) Hypertension II. Status epilepticus, aspiration pneumonia Example 2 I a) Right hemispheric CVA with left hemiparesis I b) Systemic hypertension, Diabetes Mellitus
Results: Two or more competing causes Example 3 I a) Newly diagnosed HIV infection I b) Chronic hepatitis B infection
Results: Underlying cause placed in Part II Example 1 1a) Altered mental state with recurrent seizures 1b) Cerebral toxoplasmosis II. Retroviral disease Example 2 I a) Paralytic ileus I b) Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis II. Alcoholic liver cirrhosis
Results: Underlying cause placed in Part II Example 3 I a) Respiratory arrest/Cardiac arrest I b) Severe Infection II Burns 96% (full thickness) Example 4 I a) Sepsis I b) Gangrene of left foot II. Type 2 Diabetes mellitus with nephropathy
Discussion • To get accurate mortality data from death certificates we need: • Diagnostic accuracy • UCoD and sequence of events from UCoD to immediate cause of death should be well completed on death certificate (with time intervals, no abbreviations) • Inclusion of WHO-recommended level of detail • No deliberate falsification of diagnoses/ omission of diagnoses • Selection of UCoD and coding (usually by non-clinician) should be accurate • Errors can occur at any level • This work focused on the second one only.
Discussion • The results indicated that at least 36% had one major error likely to affect accurate selection of UCOD. • Consistent with previous studies using similar categories of major errors ranging from 16% to 33% • Errors in sequencing (16.3%) and errors in reporting mechanisms of death/unspecific causes (15.4%) the most frequent errors • Consistent with previous studies in South Africa, Greece, Australia, Taiwan and Canada. • Different from study in Nepal which had 2 or more competing causes as most frequent (ICU patients)
Discussion Various reasons found for these errors in other studies: • Several co-morbidities which can concurrently lead to death (especially in elderly patients) • Copying of the admission and discharge diagnoses directly onto the DC by clinician who did not attend to deceased • Difficulty in finding specific etiology in some conditions like sepsis • Poor knowledge of Death Certificate completion • Low perceived importance of the Death Certificate
Discussion • Educational interventions used in previous studies proved useful in improving DC accuracy • Use of printed materials on death certificate completionalone led to a led to significant drop in Kansas USA though not much improvement seen in similar intervention in Australia • Interactive sessions have been shown to perform much better. • Studies in Canada, UK and Kansas, USA showed that interactive workshops/seminars resulted in significant decrease in major errors .
Recommendations • In KATH, we propose that during mortality meetings discussions be held on the correct completion of death certificates for the mortality cases discussed. • COD documentation should be discussed during orientation for new medical personnel
Acknowledgement • Hannah Marfo and Emmanuel Adomako– HI officers, PHU, KATH: Data collection and entry • Ward-In charges, KATH
References • World Health Organization. International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems. - 10th revision, Volume 2 Instruction Manual, edition 2010. • Slater DN. Certifying the cause of death: an audit of wording inaccuracies. J ClinPathol 1993: 46(3):232-4 • B Swift, K West. Death certification: an audit of practice entering the 21st Century. J ClinPathol2002;55:275–279. • Cheng T-J, Lee F-C, Lin S-J, et al. Improper cause-of-death statements by specialty of certifying physician: a cross-sectional study in two medical centres in Taiwan. BMJ Open 2012;2:e001229. • Haque et al. Death certificate completion skills of hospital physicians in a developing country. BMC Health Services Research 2013 13:205. • Myer KA, Farquhar DRE. Improving the accuracy of death certification. CMAJ 1998;158:1317e23.
References • Bobbi S. Pritt, Nicholas J. Hardin, Jeffrey A. Richmond, and Steven L. Shapiro (2005) Death Certification Errors at an Academic Institution. Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine: November 2005, Vol. 129, No. 11, pp. 1476-1479. • Burger EH, van der Merwe L, Volmink J. Errors in the completion of death notification form. S Afr Med J 2007;97:1077e81. • KatsakioriPF, Panagiotopoulou EC, Sakellaropoulos GC, Papazafiropoulou A, Kardara M. Errors in death certificates in a rural area of Greece. Rural and Remote Health (Internet) 2007; 7: 822. Available: http://www.rrh.org.au/articles/subviewnew.asp?ArticleID=822 (Accessed 7 July 2016) • Maharjan L, Shah A, Shrestha KB et al. Errors in cause-of-death statement on death certificates in intensive care unit of Kathmandu, Nepal. BMC Health Services Research (2015) 15:507 • Selinger CP, Ellis RA, Harrington MG. A good death certificate: improved performance by simple educational measures. Postgraduate Medical Journal. 2007;83(978):285-286. doi:10.1136/pgmj.2006.054833.