AIM: To ascertain the impact of routine application of the informed consent form at the primary dental care units of the Galician Health Service. STUDY DESIGN: Non random selection of consecutive patients seeking tooth extraction between 9 January and 7 March 2007 at the dental care units of Burela, Praza do Ferrol and Viveiro (Lugo). The study included sociodemographic, clinical, utilization, behavioural and IC-related variables. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 462 patients, mainly males (n=249; 53.9%) entered the study. The mean age of the participants was 57.87+/-17.54 years. 93.7% of the patients gave their consent for tooth extraction, whereas 47.3% did not want to be informed. The average time employed for obtaining the informed consent was 3.40+/-1.87 minutes, with a median of 4 and the same mode. The referred stress values did not differ before and after reading the informed consent form 3.28+/-2.52 vs 3.41+/-2.45 (p=0.661). CONCLUSION: Routine application of the informed consent form before tooth extraction under local anaesthesia did not impair clinical practice nor is it a barrier to dental care. The use of this form does not require changes beyond the allocation of the time necessary for its completion.
AIM: To ascertain the impact of routine application of the informed consent form at the primary dental care units of the Galician Health Service. STUDY DESIGN: Non random selection of consecutive patients seeking tooth extraction between 9 January and 7 March 2007 at the dental care units of Burela, Praza do Ferrol and Viveiro (Lugo). The study included sociodemographic, clinical, utilization, behavioural and IC-related variables. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 462 patients, mainly males (n=249; 53.9%) entered the study. The mean age of the participants was 57.87+/-17.54 years. 93.7% of the patients gave their consent for tooth extraction, whereas 47.3% did not want to be informed. The average time employed for obtaining the informed consent was 3.40+/-1.87 minutes, with a median of 4 and the same mode. The referred stress values did not differ before and after reading the informed consent form 3.28+/-2.52 vs 3.41+/-2.45 (p=0.661). CONCLUSION: Routine application of the informed consent form before tooth extraction under local anaesthesia did not impair clinical practice nor is it a barrier to dental care. The use of this form does not require changes beyond the allocation of the time necessary for its completion.