From the patient's perspective: is there a need to improve the quality of informed consent for surgery in training hospitals?

Abstract

Objective: This study was performed to evaluate the presurgical informed consent process at a training hospital in Jamaica.

Methods: A postoperative survey was administered to all consecutive able and willing adult patients who underwent the presurgical informed consent process with surgical residents during a 5-week period. Information was collected on patient demographics and patients' perception and satisfaction with the informed consent process.

Results: There were 210 surveys completed. Patients were unaware of the training status of the physician involved with their presurgical informed consent process in 48% of cases. Nineteen (9%) patients were instructed to sign a consent document without any discussion. An attempt was made to secure a signature after some discussion with the remaining 191 patients. Patients reported that details of the operation were discussed 74% of the time; potential benefits of the surgery, 72% of the time; potential morbidity, 84% of the time; potential mortality, 19% of the time; predicted postoperative course, 49% of the time; projected recovery, 26% of the time; and other treatment options, 33% of the time. Forty-five patients believed that they were instructed to sign the consent document with minimal discussion. At termination of the consent process, only 70% of the 210 patients reported that they signed the consent form voluntarily. Overall, 67% of patients thought the current informed consent process was unsatisfactory.

Conclusion: The current informed consent process in use in the surgical training program at the University Hospital of the West Indies requires improvement to meet expected ethical and legal standards.