Background: Urgent primary care is an important entry point for patients with serious acute illness. Diagnostic uncertainty complicates early recognition. This review examined missed diagnoses, diagnostic delays, and under-triage preceding emergency or acute hospital assessment. Methods: Published original studies available through 31 Jan 2026 were examined. Studies addressed initial general practice, urgent care, or out-of-hours assessment with subsequent diagnostic follow-up. Findings were grouped by condition and outcome definition, using narrative synthesis. Results: Ten original reports addressed coronary syndromes, sepsis, pulmonary embolism, stroke, and appendicitis. In 2,023 chest-discomfort callers, final telephone urgency allocation had 86% sensitivity for coronary syndromes or other life-threatening events. In a sepsis cohort, infection was unsuspected in 43 of 100 patients examined by general practitioners. Pulmonary embolism studies identified substantial primary-care delay, including delays exceeding seven days in 33 of 128 patients with preceding relevant consultations. Among 291 children with appendicitis in a primary-care cohort, 55 were initially misdiagnosed. A Danish stroke-pathway study reported 63.1% sensitivity for stroke or transient ischaemic attack recognition. Conclusions: Diagnostic problems occurred in several urgent primary-care pathways. Under-triage represented a distinct outcome from confirmed diagnostic error. Findings support condition-specific assessment, explicit reassessment arrangements, and better linkage between primary-care encounters and subsequent emergency diagnoses, while restricting conclusions to the settings and outcomes studied.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alsagaihe et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: