Literature DB >> 11711453

Risks of elective cardiac surgery: what do patients want to know?

N Beresford1, L Seymour, C Vincent, N Moat.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine patients' individual requirements for risk disclosure before surgery.
DESIGN: Structured interview and questionnaire.
SETTING: 50 patients interviewed following coronary artery bypass grafting or valve replacement or repair. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient assessment of the nature and probability of risks they would have wished to be informed of from a pool comprising death and 13 postoperative complications.
RESULTS: Out of 50 patients, 21 (42%) wanted no risk information at all, 25 (50%) did not want to be advised of the risk of death, and 27 (54%) did not want information about the risk of permanent stroke. This contrasts with standard practice of routinely informing patients of the risk of death and stroke. However, there were pronounced individual patient preferences. Three groups of patients emerged: those requiring little or no risk information, those requiring information about major risks, and those requiring full risk disclosure. Patients were not generally concerned about the specific probabilities of any risk.
CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians counselling patients before operation should routinely discuss patient preferences before risk disclosure, distinguishing among a preference for "no risk information", "all potentially relevant risks", and "those risks considered significant or likely to occur". The fact of individual patient preferences may undermine the concept of the "reasonable patient" in determination of the legal requirements for risk disclosure. Future studies, in addition to replicating the present findings, should examine the reasons underlying individual patient preferences and the long term implications of degrees of risk disclosure, particularly when adverse outcomes occur.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11711453      PMCID: PMC1729994          DOI: 10.1136/heart.86.6.626

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heart        ISSN: 1355-6037            Impact factor:   5.994


  8 in total

1.  What questions do patients with curable prostate cancer want answered?

Authors:  D Feldman-Stewart; M D Brundage; C Hayter; P Groome; J C Nickel; H Downes; W J Mackillop
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2000 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.583

2.  Predicting operative risk for coronary artery surgery in the United Kingdom: a comparison of various risk prediction algorithms.

Authors:  B Bridgewater; H Neve; N Moat; T Hooper; M Jones
Journal:  Heart       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 5.994

3.  Perils, pitfalls, and possibilities in talking about medical risk.

Authors:  S T Bogardus; E Holmboe; J F Jekel
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999-03-17       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Informed consent: patient information forms in chemotherapy trials.

Authors:  D R White; H B Muss; R Michielutte; M R Cooper; D V Jackson; F Richards; J J Stuart; C L Spurr
Journal:  Am J Clin Oncol       Date:  1984-04       Impact factor: 2.339

5.  Satisfying patients' needs for surgical information.

Authors:  M H Edwards
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1990-04       Impact factor: 6.939

Review 6.  Patient participation in decision-making.

Authors:  E Guadagnoli; P Ward
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 4.634

7.  Barriers to informed consent.

Authors:  C W Lidz; A Meisel; M Osterweis; J L Holden; J H Marx; M R Munetz
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1983-10       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  What are the information priorities for cancer patients involved in treatment decisions? An experienced surrogate study in Hodgkin's disease.

Authors:  S Turner; E J Maher; T Young; J Young; G Vaughan Hudson
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 7.640

  8 in total
  6 in total

1.  Good clinical practice and informed consent are inseparable.

Authors:  L Doyal
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 2.  Provision of a surgeon's performance data for people considering elective surgery.

Authors:  Amanda Henderson; Simon Henderson
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-02-09

3.  Anaesthetists' and surgeons' attitudes towards informed consent in the UK: an observational study.

Authors:  A A B Jamjoom; S White; S M Walton; J G Hardman; I K Moppett
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2010-02-23       Impact factor: 2.652

4.  Informed consent in robotic surgery: quality of information and patient perception.

Authors:  Alessia Ferrarese; Giada Pozzi; Felice Borghi; Luca Pellegrino; Pierpaolo Di Lorenzo; Bruno Amato; Michele Santangelo; Massimo Niola; Valter Martino; Emanuele Capasso
Journal:  Open Med (Wars)       Date:  2016-08-02

5.  Information gaps for patients requiring craniotomy for benign brain lesion: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Linda Rozmovits; Kathleen Joy Khu; Soha Osman; Fred Gentili; Abhijit Guha; Mark Bernstein
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2009-07-03       Impact factor: 4.130

6.  Informed consent in clinical practice: patients' experiences and perspectives following surgery.

Authors:  Joseph Ochieng; William Buwembo; Ian Munabi; Charles Ibingira; Haruna Kiryowa; Gabriel Nzarubara; Erisa Mwaka
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2015-12-09
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.