Consent to surgery in a high risk specialty: a prospective audit

A prospective audit was performed to assess how well patients were being consented for neurosurgery. Sixty patients with various neurosurgical conditions were included in the study. Audit was performed firstly by means of a questionnaire to examine the type of information given to patients, and thei...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England 2000-05, Vol.82 (3), p.213-216
Main Authors: Ellamushi, H E, Khan, R, Kitchen, N D
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Humans
Informed Consent
London
Medical Audit
Medical Records - standards
Neurosurgical Procedures
Patient Satisfaction
Prospective Studies
Surveys and Questionnaires
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:A prospective audit was performed to assess how well patients were being consented for neurosurgery. Sixty patients with various neurosurgical conditions were included in the study. Audit was performed firstly by means of a questionnaire to examine the type of information given to patients, and their understanding of such information. Secondly, the patient's medical notes were reviewed to analyse any written evidence by the consenting doctor for the consenting procedure. 100% of the patients felt that they had been informed satisfactorily about the nature of their condition and the nature of the operation. 92% understood the specific risks of their proposed operation. However, only 25% were informed about the general risks of surgery and anaesthesia. Only 33% felt that they were informed fully about alternative treatment options. 97% of the patients felt that they had reached an informed decision regarding surgery. 67% of the case notes contained information on the nature and specific risks of the operation, while information on general risks of surgery and anaesthesia was documented in only 17% of the case notes. 33% of the case notes contained no information for the consenting procedure. Our audit showed that the patients had a good understanding of the nature and aim of the operation and the specific risks. Areas that require improvement are explaining the general risks of surgery and alternative treatment. For the consenting doctor, there should be more documentation in the notes, and there should be mention of the doctor's satisfaction that the patient was deemed to be competent and had made an informed decision.
ISSN:0035-8843
1478-7083