Bartholow, Tanner

Context.— The Goldman criteria are widely used to categorize diagnostic discrepancies in autopsy reports for hospital quality assurance. Despite their adoption, little is known about how consistently they are applied across institutions. Objective.— To evaluate the interrater reliability among academic pathologists applying the Goldman criteria to classify missed diagnoses in autopsy cases. Design.— Thirty autopsy cases from 2 academic hospitals were reviewed by 5 experienced autopsy pathologists. Each reviewer independently assigned Goldman classification scores (class I–IV) to missed diagnoses based on the original 1983 definitions. Consensus was defined as at least 60% agreement (≥3 of 5 raters). Fleiss κ and Gwet AC1 were calculated to assess interrater reliability. Results.— A total of 196 missed diagnoses were identified by at least 1 rater. Only 26% (51 of 196) achieved a consensus Goldman classification, and just 4% (8 of 196) had unanimous classification agreement. Most diagnoses (65%; 127 of 196) were not identified by at least 3 raters. Among consensus classification ratings, 49% (25 of 51) were class IV. Fleiss κ was 0.176 (slight agreement) while Gwet AC1 was 0.390 (fair agreement). Collapsing major (classes I–II) and minor (classes III–IV) categories modestly improved agreement. Conclusions.— Interrater agreement in applying the Goldman criteria is only fair to moderate, suggesting significant subjectivity in their application. As the criteria are used for institutional comparison and quality metrics, efforts to standardize definitions and provide reviewer training are warranted to improve reproducibility and utility.

Context.— After-death care can be complicated and time-consuming for clinical staff, and frustrating for bereaved families. Delays and errors can have damaging legal and reputational consequences for hospitals. Offices of Decedent Affairs (ODAs) have been proposed as a solution, and their potential benefits have been described in several single institution reports. The literature lacks a contemporary and comprehensive review of existing ODAs and their approaches. Objective.— To describe the process of establishing a new ODA and to provide a snapshot of the spectrum of structure, function, and impact of existing ODAs in the United States. Design.— A survey was administered to 11 established ODAs spread across the continental United States. Programs were identified through the College of American Pathologists Autopsy Committee and a Medical Autopsy Listserv. Results.— Eleven ODAs returned the survey, representing more than 190 cumulative years of experience in decedent care in the hospital setting (median, 10 years). There was a wide range in staffing (both staff size and background) as well as scope of services offered. The median ratio of hospital deaths to full-time equivalent (FTE) staffing was 360 deaths per FTE. Respondents reported that ODAs unburden clinical providers and facilitate decedent management. Some respondents reported a quicker turnover of hospital beds and shorter intervals between pronouncement of death and autopsy. ODAs increased autopsy rates when the autopsy services were part of the ODA. Conclusions.— This survey provides practical information for hospitals considering establishing a new ODA and useful benchmarks for existing ODA programs.

Context.— Decedent Affairs Offices and Programs can serve as an avenue to assist medical centers in facilitating efficient and comprehensive decedent management, despite a paucity of literature on their roles, establishment, and efficacy. Objective.— To characterize the motivations and rationales for establishing Decedent Affairs Offices. Design.— A survey was administered to 11 established Decedent Affairs Offices/Programs, identified through the College of American Pathologists Autopsy Committee and a Medical Autopsy Listserv. The questions comprehensively cover establishment, operations, and outcomes data available by institution. Results.— Survey respondents reported the rationale for starting their programs and the benefits such offices can have. Conclusions.— Decedent Affairs Offices and Programs provide a useful option to medical centers to navigate the increasingly complex task of comprehensive decedent management. The present survey helps to delineate the similarities and differences between these programs at 11 institutions, to aid nascent programs in their establishment and growth over time.