Differential diagnosis of jaundice: junior staff experience with the Copenhagen pocket chart

ABSTRACT— Originally published in 1984, the Copenhagen Pocket Chart for early differentiation between causes of jaundice has been tested with success in centres outside Denmark. Using a logistic discrimination model, it estimates probabilities of obstruction and non‐obstruction in each case (and provides a further subdivision if desired). Here we evaluate its performance in the hands of young clinicians on a consecutive series of 173 jaundiced patients from two Danish hospitals. The chart performed as well as in the original series: confident diagnoses (probability ≥ 0.80) were assigned to 124 patients; of these 115 proved correct (93%). In 46 patients diagnostic probabilities were <0.80, and 3 patients had an unknown cause of jaundice. There were 108 cases in which physician and chart were in agreement, both with a confident diagnosis, and only one of these cases was wrong. In one hospital, contributing 107 cases, each patient was independently examined by a medical student in addition to the physician's examination. Student performance was equally good, practically speaking, in particular when taking the scores on the chart into consideration. As to observer disagreement, the student and the physician typically differed on 0–2 of the chart's 21 items. In no case, however, did this lead to a confident obstructive diagnosis being changed into a confident diagnosis of non‐obstruction, or vice versa.