Literature DB >> 17535613

A comparison of the views of patients and medical staff in relation to the process of informed consent.

M G Berry1, Jennifer Unwin, G L Ross, Elizabeth Peacock, A Juma.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The quality and quantity of information required in the consent process is well documented, but there is little extant literature regarding timing of either information about the proposed procedure or the act of consent itself. With the recent introduction of a new NHS-wide consent form, we wished to determine the preferences of both patients and staff to ascertain whether any concordance of views existed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A 10-point questionnaire, developed in conjunction with the department of clinical psychology was completed by 242 patients selected for surgery over a 4-month period. Identical questionnaires were completed by local staff (n = 50) and national consultant plastic surgeons (n = 56).
RESULTS: The cumulative majority (61.8%) preferred information at the specialist out-patient appointment (OPA). There was a significant difference (P < 0.001) between patients and staff as to information provision by the specialist as compared to non-specialists; staff indicating it much more strongly. As to the timing of consent form signature, 40.2% preferred signature on admission with no statistically significant difference between subgroups. An additional pre-operative clinic, for consent form signing, was selected by 27.3%. Staff expressed this view more often than patients (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients prefer information about a planned surgical procedure at their specialist OPA and final consent for surgery when admitted to the ward. Staff had quite definite views and felt an additional pre-operative out-patient appointment to be beneficial, more so than the patients themselves.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17535613      PMCID: PMC1963599          DOI: 10.1308/003588407X183391

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl        ISSN: 0035-8843            Impact factor:   1.891


  19 in total

1.  New consent forms issued by the Department of Health.

Authors:  Bruce Campbell
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 1.891

2.  Issues of consent in renal transplantation.

Authors:  A McLaren; G Morris-Stiff; J Casey
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 1.891

3.  Informed consent: patients' and junior doctors' perceptions of the consent procedure.

Authors:  D J Houghton; S Williams; J D Bennett; G Back; A S Jones
Journal:  Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci       Date:  1997-12

4.  Do they listen? A review of information retained by patients following consent for reduction mammoplasty.

Authors:  Y Godwin
Journal:  Br J Plast Surg       Date:  2000-03

5.  Evaluating the benefits of a patient information video during the informed consent process.

Authors:  J Weston; M Hannah; J Downes
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  1997-03

6.  Patient education and informed consent in head and neck surgery.

Authors:  Yvonne Chan; Jonathan C Irish; Stephen J Wood; Lorne E Rotstein; Dale H Brown; Patrick J Gullane; Gina A Lockwood
Journal:  Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2002-11

7.  Factors affecting quality of informed consent.

Authors:  C Lavelle-Jones; D J Byrne; P Rice; A Cuschieri
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1993-04-03

8.  An approach that integrates patient education and informed consent in breast augmentation.

Authors:  John B Tebbetts; Terrye B Tebbetts
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2002-09-01       Impact factor: 4.730

9.  A randomized trial using videotape to present consent information for colonoscopy.

Authors:  P Agre; R C Kurtz; B J Krauss
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1994 May-Jun       Impact factor: 9.427

10.  Informed consent: what do patients want to know?

Authors:  P A Newton-Howes; N D Bedford; B R Dobbs; F A Frizelle
Journal:  N Z Med J       Date:  1998-09-11
View more
  3 in total

1.  Patients' view of their preoperative education for radical prostatectomy: does it change after surgery?

Authors:  Johannes Huber; Andreas Ihrig; Wolfgang Herzog; Christian G Huber; Beryl Konyango; Eva Löser; Gencay Hatiboglu; Boris A Hadaschik; Sascha Pahernik; Markus Hohenfellner
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 2.037

2.  What a signature adds to the consent process.

Authors:  Peter Neary; Ronan A Cahill; W O Kirwan; E Kiely; H P Redmond
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-04-10       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Preoperative informed consent: is it truly informed?

Authors:  M Jawaid; M Farhan; Z Masood; Smn Husnain
Journal:  Iran J Public Health       Date:  2012-09-01       Impact factor: 1.429

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.