Literature DB >> 9785548

Informed consent: what do patients want to know?

P A Newton-Howes1, N D Bedford, B R Dobbs, F A Frizelle.   

Abstract

AIM: To determine which aspects of informed consent are important to patients and surgeons and to determine where there is disparity and similarity.
METHOD: A questionnaire was developed from the Disability Commissioner's Regulations (1996) and was administered to 256 patients and 37 doctors at Christchurch Hospital.
RESULTS: According to patients the five most important aspects of informed consent were: (1) the major risks, (2) quality of life, (3) outcome, (4) consequences of not undergoing the procedure and (5) quantity of life. The five most important aspects to the doctors were (1) the general nature of the procedure, (2) major risks, (3) consequences of not undergoing the procedure, (4) alternative options and (5) consequences of the procedure in regard to management. The aspects of informed consent of greatest divergence (power of divergence, p < 0.05) between patient and doctor were (1) the importance of technical details of the procedure, (2) cost to the country, (3) qualifications of the doctor, (4) experimental and non-conventional treatment options and (5) whether the doctor would have the procedure if they were in the position of the patient.
CONCLUSIONS: This study has identified aspects of informed consent that patients and doctors consider important, as well as aspects where there are significant differences. Both patients and doctors consider the explanations of risks and complications important, especially if the complication is serious and risk is greater than 1 in 1000. Patients consider aspects of outcome (quantity and quality of life) important, while doctors are concerned about "process" including the general nature of the procedure and consequences of the procedure for the patient's management. This study gives direction to medical practitioners concerning what it is that patient's are wanting to know during informed consent about a procedure.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Professional Patient Relationship

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9785548

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Z Med J        ISSN: 0028-8446


  17 in total

Review 1.  Informed consent for clinical treatment.

Authors:  Daniel E Hall; Allan V Prochazka; Aaron S Fink
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2012-03-05       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 2.  Risks and medico-legal aspects of endoscopic sinus surgery: a review.

Authors:  M Re; G Magliulo; R Romeo; F M Gioacchini; E Pasquini
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2013-08-14       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  What do patients really want to know in an informed consent procedure? A questionnaire-based survey of patients in the Bath area, UK.

Authors:  H El-Wakeel; G J Taylor; J J T Tate
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 2.903

4.  The process of informed consent for urgent abdominal surgery.

Authors:  R Kay; A K Siriwardena
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 2.903

5.  Quantitative aspects of informed consent: considering the dose response curve when estimating quantity of information.

Authors:  N Lynöe; K Hoeyer
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 2.903

6.  What patients want to know before they have cataract surgery.

Authors:  M J Elder; A Suter
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 4.638

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

Authors:  M G Berry; Jennifer Unwin; G L Ross; Elizabeth Peacock; A Juma
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 1.891

8.  Informed consent in interventional radiology - are we doing enough?

Authors:  Akash Prashar; Saqib Butt; Davide Giuseppe Castiglione; Nadeem Shaida
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-04-29       Impact factor: 3.629

9.  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

10.  Should patients set the agenda for informed consent? A prospective survey of desire for information and discussion prior to routine cataract surgery.

Authors:  Lee Teak Tan; Huw Jenkins; John Roberts-Harry; Michael Austin
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 2.423

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.