ÌÇÐÄvlog

Object moved to here.

Implications of Diagnostic Error in Ocular Surface Disease: The Role of Anchoring and Ambiguous Diagnostic Terminology | Ophthalmology | JAMA Ophthalmology | ÌÇÐÄvlog

ÌÇÐÄvlog

[Skip to Navigation]
Sign In
Viewpoint
±·´Ç±¹±ð³¾²ú±ð°ùÌý14, 2024

Implications of Diagnostic Error in Ocular Surface Disease: The Role of Anchoring and Ambiguous Diagnostic Terminology

Author Affiliations
  • 1John F. Hardesty, MD, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri
  • 2Surgical Services, University of Miami, Miami, Florida
  • 3Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, University of Miami, Miami, Florida
  • 4PharmaLogic Development, Inc, San Rafael, California
  • 5Department of Ophthalmology and Vision Science, University of California, Davis School of Medicine, Sacramento
JAMA Ophthalmol. Published online November 14, 2024. doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2024.4867

The Institute of Medicine estimates that 5% of adults experience a diagnostic error in outpatient care and that diagnostic errors are responsible for 17% of inpatient adverse events.1 Ophthalmology is not exempt from this problem. An analysis of patients referred to neuro-ophthalmologists found that the referral diagnosis was incorrect 49% of the time, and 26% of patients experienced harm as a result.2 In a study of referrals to an ophthalmic emergency department, the misdiagnosis rate was 25%.3 Recognizing this problem, the American Academy of Ophthalmology and the American Board of Ophthalmology have begun discussing how to build a culture of safety in ophthalmology.4 So, why are these high rates of ophthalmic diagnostic error occurring?

×