Background: Informed consent in the modern era is a common and important topic both for the well-informed patient and to prevent unnecessary litigation. However, the effectiveness of informed consent in trauma patients is an under-researched area. This paper aims to assess the differences in patient recall of the consent process and desire for information by performing a comparative analysis between orthopaedic trauma and elective patients.
Methods: Information from 41 consecutive elective operations and 40 consecutive trauma operations was collected on the first post-operative day.
Results: 100% of elective patients and 90% of trauma patients knew what operation they had received (p = 0.06). Overall recall of complications was poor, but was significantly lower in trauma patients compared with elective patients (62% vs 22%, p<0.001). 30% of trauma patients desired more information about their operation compared to 12% of elective patients (p = 0.049), although only 35% of trauma patients wanted written as well as verbal explanations, compared to 85% of elective patients p<0.001). Overall 100% of elective and 90% of trauma patients were happy with the consent process (p = 0.06). Subset analysis of neck of femur compared to other trauma patients showed that the above factors were not significantly different between the two groups.
Conclusions: Recall of complications in the trauma patients is significantly lower than in elective patients, although both groups scored poorly overall. Repeated verbal explanations should be reinforced with the option of additional information leaflets for trauma operations. Further research into the usefulness of DVDs for commonly performed operations is warranted, although official internet resources may be more cost-effective.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Competing interests: None declared.
Ethics approval: This audit was approved by the Audit head and registered with the Audit Department at Russells Hall Hospital, Dudley, UK.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Intimate partner violence (IPV) in male and female orthopaedic trauma patients: a multicentre, cross-sectional prevalence study
- Is it worth screening elective orthopaedic patients for carriage of Staphylococcus aureus? A part-retrospective case–control study in a Scottish hospital
- Which orthopaedic trauma patients are likely to refuse to participate in a clinical trial? A latent class analysis
- PREVENTion of CLots in Orthopaedic Trauma (PREVENT CLOT): a randomised pragmatic trial protocol comparing aspirin versus low-molecular-weight heparin for blood clot prevention in orthopaedic trauma patients
- Quantification of von Willebrand factor and ADAMTS-13 after traumatic injury: a pilot study
- Patient preferences for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after injury: a discrete choice experiment
- Quality evaluation of clinical practice guidelines for thromboprophylaxis in orthopaedic trauma based on AGREE II and AGREE-REX: a systematic review protocol
- Association between perception of fault for the crash and function, return to work and health status 1 year after road traffic injury: a registry-based cohort study
- Evaluating glial and neuronal blood biomarkers GFAP and UCH-L1 as gradients of brain injury in concussive, subconcussive and non-concussive trauma: a prospective cohort study
- ‘Golden Patient’: A quality improvement project aiming to improve trauma theatre efficiency in the Royal Gwent Hospital