Korean J Leg Med.  2012 May;36(1):27-33. 10.7580/KoreanJLegMed.2012.36.1.27.

Discrepant Causes of Death between Medical Death Certificates and Autopsy Reports (II)

• Na JI
• Lee YJ
• Kim HS
• Min BW
• Kim HJ
• Chung SH
• Na JY
• Park JT

• KMID: 2250313
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.7580/KoreanJLegMed.2012.36.1.27

Abstract

The postmortem examination certificate and death certificate provide proof of death and supply important data used to establish health statistics. However, the format of the form and the accuracy of postmortem examination and death certificates yield errors that must be corrected by comparison with postmortem studies. We reviewed 401 autopsies performed in the Department of Forensic Medicine of Chonnam National University Medical School from January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2011 and compared the reports with their postmortem examination certificates and death certificates. Of the 252 cases submitted with death certifications, 60 cases were concordant with the cause of death on the autopsy report. Eighty-nine cases had clear descriptions of the cause of death. Of these cases, 47 were from postmortem examination, 42 were from death certificates; 17 were natural deaths, 72 were unnatural. Concordance in each group was 59.6% (28/47 cases), 76.2% (32/42 cases), 41.2% (7/17 cases), and 73.6% (53/72 cases). We thus identified various types of errors in postmortem examination and death certificates. This study reveals a high rate of discrepancy between causes of death reported on death certificates and postmortem examination certificates. There are a few useful death certificate and postmortem examination certificates that can be used as a model, based on which we propose several remedies to increase the accuracy of death and postmortem examination certificates.

Keyword

postmortem examination certificate; death certificate; death; discrepancy; autopsy

MeSH Terms

Autopsy
Cause of Death
Certification
Death Certificates
Forensic Medicine
Schools, Medical

Reference

1. Article 17 2009. Medical Service Act. Available at: http://likms.assembly.go.kr/law/jsp/law/Law.jsp?WORK_TYPE=LAW_BON&LAW_ID=A1549&PROM_NO=11252&PROM_DT=20120201&HanChk=Y.

2. Korean Medical Association. Guide to Medical Certificate. 2003. Seoul: Korean Medical Association press;9–10.

3. Na JY, Min BW, Lee YJ, Kim HS, Park JT. The Discrepancy of the Causes of Death between Medical Death Certificates and Autopsy Reports. Korean J Leg Med. 2009. 33:50–52.

4. Kang YS, Lee KR, Park IC, Cho KH, Kim SH, Lee HS. Survey of the causes of death on the death certificates of DOA patients. J Korean Soc Emerg Med. 2001. 12:385–392.

5. Roulson J, Benbow EW, Hasleton PS. Discrepancies between clinical and autopsy diagnosis and the value of post mortem histology; a meta-analysis and review. Histopathology. 2005. 47:551–559.

6. Cameron HM, McGoogan E. A prospective study of 1152 hospital autopsies: I. Inaccuracies in death certification. J Pathol. 1981. 133:273–283.

7. Kim YS, Park MI, Park JW, Choi CH, Lee JH. Defect in post-mortem examiniation system reviewed by the realities of death certificate issuing. Korean J Leg Med. 2008. 32:101–104.

8. Kim JH, Lee SD. About reform of autopsy system: focus into the limited autopsy. Korean J Leg Med. 2004. 28:18–23.

9. Ravakhah K. Death certificates are not reliable: revivification of the autopsy. South Med J. 2006. 99:728–733.

10. Kircher T, Nelson J, Burdo H. The autopsy as a measure of accuracy of the death certificate. N Engl J Med. 1985. 313:1263–1269.

11. Goldman L, Sayson R, Robbins S, Cohn LH, Bettmann M, Weisberg M. The value of the autopsy in three medical eras. N Engl J Med. 1983. 308:1000–1005.

12. Rutty GN, Duerden RM, Carter N, Clark JC. Are coroners' necropsies necessary? A prospective study examining whether a "view and grant" system of death certification could be introduced into England and Wales. J Clin Pathol. 2001. 54:279–284.