Literature DB >> 19381720

Responding to trust: surgeons' perspective on informed consent.

Martin F McKneally1, Douglas K Martin, Esther Ignagni, Jason D'Cruz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Every day thousands of surgeons and patients negotiate their way through the complex process of decision-making about operative treatments. We conducted a series of qualitative studies, asking patients and surgeons to describe their experience and beliefs about informed decision-making and consent. This study focuses on surgeons' views.
METHODS: Open-ended interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with thoracic surgeons who treated esophageal cancer patients by esophagectomy, and general surgeons who routinely performed laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Their views were analyzed using a qualitative approach, grounded in the perspectives of the participants.
RESULTS: Five dominant themes emerged from the analysis: (1) making informed decisions; (2) communicating information and confidence; (3) managing expectations and fears; (4) consent as a decision to trust; (5) commitment inspired by trust. These themes are illustrated by verbatim quotes from the surgeon interviews.
CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons carefully assess the risks and benefits of treatment before consenting to perform operative interventions. They are influenced by objective findings and by affective factors such as courage and the determination to survive expressed by their patients. They manage risks, doubts, and fears-both their patients' and their own-relying on trust and commitment on both sides to ensure the success of the surgical mission. The trust of their patients has a strong influence on the surgeons' decisions and actions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19381720     DOI: 10.1007/s00268-009-0021-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Surg        ISSN: 0364-2313            Impact factor:   3.352


  12 in total

1.  Some realism about informed consent.

Authors:  Carl E Schneider
Journal:  J Lab Clin Med       Date:  2005-06

2.  Informed consent: recall by patients tested postoperatively.

Authors:  G Robinson; A Merav
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  1976-09       Impact factor: 4.330

3.  The treating physician's view of informed consent: observations made in a retrospective study.

Authors:  G Robinson
Journal:  Conn Med       Date:  1986-12

4.  Abandoning informed consent.

Authors:  R M Veatch
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  1995 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.683

5.  Informed consent: ambiguity in theory and practice.

Authors:  W D White
Journal:  J Health Polit Policy Law       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 2.265

6.  Arrogance.

Authors:  F J Ingelfinger
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1980-12-25       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Concepts of trust among patients with serious illness.

Authors:  D Mechanic; S Meyer
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 4.634

8.  Reasonable men and sick human beings.

Authors:  R Sherlock
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 4.965

9.  Some limits of informed consent.

Authors:  O O'Neill
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.903

10.  The leap to trust: perspective of cholecystectomy patients on informed decision making and consent.

Authors:  Martin F McKneally; Esther Ignagni; Douglas K Martin; Jason D'Cruz
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 6.113

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  Biobanking for research in surgery: are surgeons in charge for advancing translational research or mere assistants in biomaterial and data preservation?

Authors:  Wolfgang E Thasler; Reinhard M K Thasler; Celine Schelcher; Karl-Walter Jauch
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2013-02-22       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 2.  Informed consent in surgery.

Authors:  Miguel A Cainzos; S González-Vinagre
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Telling "everything" but not "too much": the surgeon's dilemma in consultations about breast cancer.

Authors:  Nicola Mendick; Bridget Young; Christopher Holcombe; Peter Salmon
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Reconciling the principle of patient autonomy with the practice of informed consent: decision-making about prognostication in uveal melanoma.

Authors:  Sharon A Cook; Bertil Damato; Ernie Marshall; Peter Salmon
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2010-10-28       Impact factor: 3.377

5.  Surgical "buy-in": the contractual relationship between surgeons and patients that influences decisions regarding life-supporting therapy.

Authors:  Margaret L Schwarze; Ciaran T Bradley; Karen J Brasel
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 7.598

6.  A survey of the current practice of the informed consent process in general surgery in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Wouter Kg Leclercq; Bram J Keulers; Saskia Houterman; Margot Veerman; Johan Legemaate; Marc R Scheltinga
Journal:  Patient Saf Surg       Date:  2013-01-21

7.  The patient and clinician experience of informed consent for surgery: a systematic review of the qualitative evidence.

Authors:  L J Convie; E Carson; D McCusker; R S McCain; N McKinley; W J Campbell; S J Kirk; M Clarke
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2020-07-11       Impact factor: 2.652

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.