The quality of medical autopsy reports. / Kvaliteten på medisinske obduksjonsrapporter.

BACKGROUND: Medical autopsies are rarely made subject to quality assurance. We have investigated the quality of autopsy reports in Norway and assessed the impact of errors on the cause of death statistics. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Every fifth medical autopsy report for adults (> 2 years) in 2014 was reviewed. The significance of the autopsy result for the registration of cause of death was studied by comparing the death certificate issued by the clinician with the coding in the Cause of Death Registry after the autopsy. RESULTS: A total of 389 autopsy reports from 15 departments of pathology were reviewed. The autopsy request, as well as the death certificate and the codes for the cause of death from the Cause of Death Registry were available for 339 and 360 cases respectively. Ninety-five requests had specified clinical questions, but were commented on by the pathologist in 33 cases. Obesity was rarely reported as a finding, even in cases of pathological deviations from a normal weight. A post-mortem virus examination or toxicology had been performed in 1 and 28 autopsies respectively. The average turnaround time for autopsies without and with a neuropathological examination was 99 and 138 days respectively. Errors in reporting the cause of death or inadequate reporting were evident in 69 cases (18 %), most frequently for deaths from cardiovascular diseases. The autopsy result led to a change to the cause of death in the Cause of Death Registry in 206 out of 360 (57 %) cases for which coding data were available. Errors in the formulation of the autopsy result resulted in erroneous coding of the cause of death in 22 out of 47 (47 %) of cases with errors. INTERPRETATION: The proportion of autopsy reports with errors in the formulation of the cause of death was unexpectedly high and may have consequences for the cause of death statistics. Long turnaround times for autopsies complicate communication with the clinician about the findings.

Water exchange versus carbon dioxide insufflation in unsedated colonoscopy: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Compared with air insufflation, water exchange and carbon dioxide (CO2) insufflation have been shown to reduce colonoscopy discomfort; however, head-to-head studies of the two methods are lacking. We aimed to compare water exchange and CO2 insufflation directly with regard to pain during primary unsedated colonoscopy. METHODS: Patients willing to undergo unsedated colonoscopy at three centers in Norway and Poland were randomized 1:1 to water exchange or CO2 insufflation during colonoscope insertion. Patients were blinded to group allocation. The primary end point was the proportion of patients reporting moderate or severe procedural pain on a 4-point verbal rating scale (VRS-4) at discharge. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients reporting no pain on the VRS-4. RESULTS: A total of 473 patients were randomized. A discharge pain questionnaire was completed by 226 of 234 patients (97 %) in the water exchange group versus 226 of 239 patients (95 %) in the CO2 group (P = 0.37). Moderate or severe pain was reported by 47 of 226 patients (21 %) in the water exchange group versus 60 of 226 patients (27 %) in the CO2 group (P = 0.15). No pain was reported by 100 of 226 patients (44 %) and 69 of 226 patients (31 %) in the water exchange and CO2 groups, respectively (P = 0.003). On-demand sedation was used in 15 patients (6 %) in each group (P = 0.95). CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant reduction in moderate or severe pain in a comparison of water exchange with CO2 insufflation. The secondary outcome of no pain was significantly more frequent in the water exchange group. Clinical trials registry number: NCT01633333.

Diagnostic value of color Doppler ultrasonography of temporal arteries and large vessels in giant cell arteritis: a consecutive case series.

OBJECTIVE: Color Doppler ultrasonography (CDUS) can detect inflammation in the vessel wall. No studies have evaluated the examination of the common carotid artery by CDUS in the diagnostics of giant cell arteritis (GCA). Our aim was to evaluate the combination of CDUS examination of the temporal, axillary, and common carotid arteries in the diagnosis of GCA. METHODS: Patients ages ≥50 years who were referred to our department between April 2010 and October 2012 and suspected to have GCA were consecutively examined. A positive clinical evaluation for GCA 6 months after the first evaluation by 3 rheumatologists was considered as the gold diagnostic standard. All patients underwent CDUS of the temporal, axillary, and common carotid arteries. A biopsy of the temporal artery was performed for most patients. RESULTS: A total of 88 patients were assessed. Forty-six patients were diagnosed to have GCA by the defined gold standard. Forty-eight patients had a positive CDUS of the temporal artery. Forty-six patients diagnosed with GCA had a positive CDUS of the temporal, common carotid, and axillary arteries (100% sensitivity) and 4 patients had a positive CDUS without having GCA (91% specificity). Among the 39 GCA patients that underwent a biopsy, vasculitis was observed in 26 patients (66%), yielding a sensitivity of 67% and a specificity of 95%. CONCLUSION: CDUS of the common carotid, axillary, and temporal arteries had an excellent sensitivity and high specificity to diagnose GCA. CDUS has the potential to replace biopsy in ordinary clinical care without compromising on sensitivity and specificity.