Literature DB >> 7360175

Informed consent -- why are its goals imperfectly realized?

B R Cassileth, R V Zupkis, K Sutton-Smith, V March.   

Abstract

We explored reasons for the failure of patients to recall major portions of the information on consent forms and in oral explanations about consent. Within one day of signing consent forms for chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or surgery, 200 cancer patients completed a test of their recall of the material in the consent explanation and filled out a questionnaire regarding their opinions of its purpose, content, and implications. Only 60 per cent understood the purpose and nature of the procedure, and only 55 per cent correctly listed even one major risk or complication. We found that three factors were related to inadequate recall: education, medical status, and the care with which patients thought they had read their consent forms before signing. Only 40 per cent of the patients had read the form "carefully." Most believed that consent forms were meant to "protect the physician's rights." Although most thought that consent forms were necessary and comprehensible and that they contained worthwhile information, the legalistic connotations of the forms appeared to lead to cursory reading and inadequate recall.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1980        PMID: 7360175     DOI: 10.1056/NEJM198004173021605

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  90 in total

1.  Monitoring clinical research: report of one hospital's experience.

Authors:  J McCusker; Z Kruszewski; B Lacey; B Schiff
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-05-01       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Patient autonomy, paternalism, and the conscientious physician.

Authors:  Stephen Wear
Journal:  Theor Med       Date:  1983-10

3.  Pharmacogenetics, ethical issues: review of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics Report.

Authors:  O P Corrigan
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.903

Review 4.  Why effective consent presupposes autonomous authorisation: a counterorthodox argument.

Authors:  M Epstein
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 2.903

5.  Parental recall of anesthesia information: informing the practice of informed consent.

Authors:  Alan R Tait; Terri Voepel-Lewis; Virginia Gauger
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2011-02-02       Impact factor: 5.108

6.  Randomised comparison of procedures for obtaining informed consent in clinical trials of treatment for cancer.

Authors:  R J Simes; M H Tattersall; A S Coates; D Raghavan; H J Solomon; H Smartt
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1986-10-25

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.  Patient comprehension of an interactive, computer-based information program for cardiac catheterization: a comparison with standard information.

Authors:  Alan R Tait; Terri Voepel-Lewis; Mauro Moscucci; Colleen M Brennan-Martinez; Robert Levine
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2009-11-09

Review 9.  Cancer information disclosure in different cultural contexts.

Authors:  Kyriaki Mystakidou; Efi Parpa; Eleni Tsilila; Emmanuela Katsouda; Lambros Vlahos
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 10.  The doctor's duty to the elderly patient in clinical trials.

Authors:  Antony Bayer; Mark Fish
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 3.923

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.