Diagnostic Discrepancies Between Emergency Department Assessment and Internal Medicine Discharge Diagnosis: A Prospective Observational Study in a Swiss Tertiary Hospital

Background/Objective: Diagnostic safety is a major challenge in emergency departments (ED), where clinicians frequently make decisions under time pressure and with incomplete information. Prospective data on diagnostic discrepancies in Swiss EDs remain limited. To determine the frequency of diagnostic discrepancies between the initial ED diagnosis and the final Internal Medicine (IM) discharge diagnosis, identify associated patient-, physician-, and context-related factors, and evaluate clinical outcomes associated with diagnostic discrepancy. Methods: We conducted a prospective observational study including 515 patients admitted from the ED to an IM ward and managed by 44 physicians at a Swiss tertiary non-university hospital. The initial ED diagnosis was compared with the IM discharge diagnosis (or diagnosis on day 28 if the patient remained hospitalized). Diagnostic discrepancies were classified using a predefined algorithm with independent expert opinion where required. Generalized linear mixed-effects models were used to assess associations between diagnostic discrepancy and mortality, in-hospital transfers and length of stay; a multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify factors associated with diagnostic discrepancy. Results: Diagnostic discrepancies were identified in 10.1% of patients (n = 52). These patients had longer hospital stays (9.3 ± 9.2 vs. 6.9 ± 5.8 days; p = 0.069) and were more frequently transferred within the hospital (17% vs. 5.8%; p = 0.006). After adjustment, diagnostic discrepancies were associated with higher odds of in-hospital transfer (OR 3.35; 95% CI 1.47–7.66; p = 0.004) and a 20% longer stay (exp β = 1.20; 95% CI 1.00–1.45; p = 0.049), although the latter was attenuated after adjustment for comorbidity. Specialist involvement in the ED was independently associated with lower odds of diagnostic discrepancy (OR 0.30; 95% CI 0.10–0.72; p = 0.015), whereas each one-point increase in physician-perceived diagnostic difficulty was associated with higher odds (OR 1.42; 95% CI 1.07–1.90; p = 0.016). Conclusions: Diagnostic discrepancies occurred in approximately one in ten patients admitted from the ED to IM and were associated with increased in-hospital transfer and, less robustly, with prolonged hospitalization. Prospective multicenter studies should evaluate strategies to reduce diagnostic discrepancies and improve diagnostic safety.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Published
2026-09-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15187177
Primary Topic
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Diagnostic Discrepancies Between Emergency Department Assessment and Internal Medicine Discharge Diagnosis: A Prospective Observational Study in a Swiss Tertiary Hospital

Theresa Ackfeld, Youcef Guéchi, Vincent Ribordy, Wolf E. Hautz et al.
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
article

Diagnostic Discrepancies Between Emergency Department Assessment and Internal Medicine Discharge Diagnosis: A Prospective Observational Study in a Swiss Tertiary Hospital

Theresa Ackfeld, Youcef Guéchi, Vincent Ribordy, Wolf E. Hautz, Thomas Schmutz, Joseph M. Schwab, Cynthia Gay, Sébastien Pugnale, Ludovic Galofaro, Thomas Castelain
article en

Abstract

Background/Objective: Diagnostic safety is a major challenge in emergency departments (ED), where clinicians frequently make decisions under time pressure and with incomplete information. Prospective data on diagnostic discrepancies in Swiss EDs remain limited. To determine the frequency of diagnostic discrepancies between the initial ED diagnosis and the final Internal Medicine (IM) discharge diagnosis, identify associated patient-, physician-, and context-related factors, and evaluate clinical outcomes associated with diagnostic discrepancy. Methods: We conducted a prospective observational study including 515 patients admitted from the ED to an IM ward and managed by 44 physicians at a Swiss tertiary non-university hospital. The initial ED diagnosis was compared with the IM discharge diagnosis (or diagnosis on day 28 if the patient remained hospitalized). Diagnostic discrepancies were classified using a predefined algorithm with independent expert opinion where required. Generalized linear mixed-effects models were used to assess associations between diagnostic discrepancy and mortality, in-hospital transfers and length of stay; a multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify factors associated with diagnostic discrepancy. Results: Diagnostic discrepancies were identified in 10.1% of patients (n = 52). These patients had longer hospital stays (9.3 ± 9.2 vs. 6.9 ± 5.8 days; p = 0.069) and were more frequently transferred within the hospital (17% vs. 5.8%; p = 0.006). After adjustment, diagnostic discrepancies were associated with higher odds of in-hospital transfer (OR 3.35; 95% CI 1.47–7.66; p = 0.004) and a 20% longer stay (exp β = 1.20; 95% CI 1.00–1.45; p = 0.049), although the latter was attenuated after adjustment for comorbidity. Specialist involvement in the ED was independently associated with lower odds of diagnostic discrepancy (OR 0.30; 95% CI 0.10–0.72; p = 0.015), whereas each one-point increase in physician-perceived diagnostic difficulty was associated with higher odds (OR 1.42; 95% CI 1.07–1.90; p = 0.016). Conclusions: Diagnostic discrepancies occurred in approximately one in ten patients admitted from the ED to IM and were associated with increased in-hospital transfer and, less robustly, with prolonged hospitalization. Prospective multicenter studies should evaluate strategies to reduce diagnostic discrepancies and improve diagnostic safety.

Journal of Clinical MedicineVol. 15(18)
University of Fribourg (CH), University Hospital of Bern (CH), Université Sorbonne Paris Nord (FR), Fribourg Development Agency (CH), Hôpital de Morges (CH)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.