Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2008 Aug;32(4):425-9.
doi: 10.1007/s00264-007-0361-6. Epub 2007 Apr 21.

The influence of written information during the consenting process on patients' recall of operative risks. A prospective randomised study

C Mauffrey  1 , E M Prempeh, J John, G Vasario
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

The influence of written information during the consenting process on patients' recall of operative risks. A prospective randomised study

C Mauffrey et al. Int Orthop. 2008 Aug.

Abstract
in English, French

In a recent article, Leigh (J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 88-B:16-18, 2006) notes that patients do not lay down memory when being counselled as to the risks involved in prospective surgery. In our article we focused on the patients' recall of risk factors involved in elective spinal surgery. We assessed the influence of written information provided to the patients during the consenting process on their recall of operative risks. The study was a prospective randomised study. All patients having elective spinal surgery were included in our study from February 2006 to November 2006 as a consecutive series. Patients were randomised into two groups, one of which received routine consent with verbal explanations (group 1), the other received the same information supplemented by a written sheet explaining the risks of the surgery (group 2). Two weeks later we assessed patients' recall of the risk involved in the surgery with a questionnaire and compared both groups with a Student t-test. Fifty-three patients (twenty in group 1 and twenty three in group 2) were involved. We noted a significant difference between the two groups in terms of mean number of risks recalled and number of patients recalling each risk (p<0.001 and p<0.005, respectively). The addition of a written sheet given to patients during the consenting process makes a significant difference in terms of their recall of the surgical risks in elective lumbar spine surgery. We advocate the routine use of written booklets during the consenting process.

Rappel: dans un article récent, Leigh montre que les patients ne se souviennent pas très bien des indicationsqui leur ont été données en ce qui concerne l’information sur les risques avant une intervention chirurgicale. Nous avons souhaité, dans notre étude mettre l’accent sur les risques pouvant survenir dans la chirurgie rachidienne. Nous avons essayé d’évaluer l’importance de l’information écrite lors de la mise en place du consentement éclairé de ces patients. Méthode : cette étude est une étude prospective randomisée. Tous les patients devant bénéficier d’une chirurgie rachidienne ont été inclus dans notre étude sur une période s’étalant de février 2006 à novembre 2006. Tous les patients consécutifs ont été randomisés en deux groupes. Le premier groupe n’ayant que des explications par voie orale, (groupe 1) et le deuxième groupe avec un complément d’informations écrites, (groupe 2). Deux semaines après, ces patients ont été évalués avec un questionnaire et les deux groupes ont été comparés. Résultats : 53 patients dans le groupe 1 et 23 dans le groupe 2 ont été pris en compte dans cette étude. Nous avons noté une différence significative entre les deux groupes soit sur le nombre d’informations retenues par le patient ou le nombre de patients ayant pris en compte ces informations. En conclusion : outre l’information orale, une information écrite remise au patient durant le processus de consentement éclairé en chirurgie du rachis lombaire, est nécessaire avec une différence significative entre les deux groupes. Nous recommandons cette information écrite de façon routinière.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Ratio of patients recalling each risk factor for both groups
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. {'text': '', 'ref_index': 1, 'ids': [{'type': 'DOI', 'value': '10.1016/S0007-1226(97)90510-5', 'is_inner': False, 'url': 'https://doi.org/10.1016/s0007-1226(97)90510-5'}, {'type': 'PubMed', 'value': '9613407', 'is_inner': True, 'url': 'https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9613407/'}]}
    2. Armstrong AP, Cole AA, Page RE (1997) Informed consent: are we doing enough? Br J Plast Surg 50:637–640 - PubMed
    1. {'text': '', 'ref_index': 1, 'ids': [{'type': 'PubMed', 'value': '2283610', 'is_inner': True, 'url': 'https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2283610/'}]}
    2. Askew G, Pearson KW, Cryer D (1990) Informed consent: can we educate patients? J R Coll Surg Edinb 35:308–310 - PubMed
    1. {'text': '', 'ref_index': 1, 'ids': [{'type': 'DOI', 'value': '10.2106/JBJS.D.02877', 'is_inner': False, 'url': 'https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.d.02877'}, {'type': 'PubMed', 'value': '16264113', 'is_inner': True, 'url': 'https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16264113/'}]}
    2. Bhattacharyya T, Yeon H, Harris M (2005) The medical-legal aspects of informed consent in orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:2395–2400 - PubMed
    1. Canterbury v Spence (1972) 464 F 2d 772. US Court of Appeals
    1. {'text': '', 'ref_index': 1, 'ids': [{'type': 'PubMed', 'value': '7360175', 'is_inner': True, 'url': 'https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7360175/'}]}
    2. Cassileth BR, Zupkis RV, Sutton-Smith K, March V (1980) Informed consent- why are its goals imperfectly realised? N England J Med 302:896–900 - PubMed

Publication types