Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Patient Reported Experience on Consenting for Surgery - Elective Versus Emergency Patients.
Maher, Dominic I; Serpell, Jonathan W; Ayton, Darshini; Lee, James C.
Afiliación
  • Maher DI; Monash University Endocrine Surgery Unit, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
  • Serpell JW; Monash University Endocrine Surgery Unit, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Department of Surgery, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
  • Ayton D; Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
  • Lee JC; Monash University Endocrine Surgery Unit, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Department of Surgery, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: James.Lee@monash.edu.
J Surg Res ; 265: 114-121, 2021 09.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33901840
INTRODUCTION: Informed consent for surgery is a medical and legal requirement, but completing these does not necessarily translate to high patient satisfaction. This patient-reported experience study aimed to examine the surgical consent process, comparing the patients' experience in elective and emergency settings. METHODS: Over a 6-mo period, postoperative patients at The Alfred Hospital Breast and Endocrine Surgical Unit were invited to participate in a survey on the surgical consent process - including perceived priorities, information provided and overall experience. Standard statistical techniques were used, with a significant P-value of < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 412 patients were invited, with 130 (32%) responses. More patients underwent elective surgery (N= 90, 69%) than emergency surgery (N = 40, 31%). Emergency patients were more likely to sign the consent form regardless of its contents (93% versus 39%, P < 0.001) and more likely to be influenced by external pressures (63% versus 1%, P < 0.001). Elective patients were more likely to want to discuss their surgery with a senior surgeon (74% versus 23%, P < 0.001) and more likely to seek advice from external sources (83% versus 10%, P < 0.001). Both groups highly valued the opportunity to ask questions (67% versus 63%, P = 0.65). CONCLUSION: This study shows patients have a range of different priorities in preparation for surgery. Therefore, each consent process should be patient-specific, and focus on providing the patient with quality resources that inform decision-making.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos / Tratamiento de Urgencia / Consentimiento Informado Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: J Surg Res Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Australia Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos / Tratamiento de Urgencia / Consentimiento Informado Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: J Surg Res Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Australia Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos