BackgroundObtaining informed consent is an essential step in the surgical pathway. Providing adequate patient education to enable informed decision making is a continued challenge of contemporary surgical practice. This study investigates whether the use of a patient information website, to augment patient education and informed consent for elective orthopaedic procedures is an effective measure.MethodsA randomised controlled trial was conducted comparing the quality of informed consent provided by a standard discussion with the treating surgeon compared to augmentation of this discussion with an online education resource (www.orthoanswer.org). Participants were recruited from orthopaedic outpatient clinics. Patients undergoing five common orthopaedic procedures were eligible to participate in the trial. The primary outcome measure was knowledge about their operation. Satisfaction with their informed consent and anxiety relating to their operation were the secondary outcome measures.ResultsThere was a statistically significant increase in patient knowledge for the intervention arm as compared to the control arm (p < 0.01). Patients in the intervention arm, had an average score of 69.25% (SD 14.91) correct answers as compared to 47.38% (SD 17.77) in the control arm. Satisfaction was also improved in the intervention arm (p = 0.043). There was no statistically significant difference between the control and intervention arm relating to their anxiety scores (p = 0.195).ConclusionsThe use of a patient education website as an augment to informed consent improves patient knowledge about their planned operation as well as satisfaction with the consent process whilst not increasing their anxiety levels. We recommend that all patients be directed to web based education tools to augment their consent.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12614001058662.
y The SNAP-2: EPICCS collaborators are listed in Supplementary material.
AbstractBackground: Decisions to admit high-risk postoperative patients to critical care may be affected by resource availability. We aimed to quantify adult ICU/high-dependency unit (ICU/HDU) capacity in hospitals from the UK, Australia, and New Zealand (NZ), and to identify and describe additional 'high-acuity' beds capable of managing high-risk patients outside the ICU/HDU environment. Methods: We used a modified Delphi consensus method to design a survey that was disseminated via investigator networks in the UK, Australia, and NZ. Hospital-and ward-level data were collected, including bed numbers, tertiary services offered, presence of an emergency department, ward staffing levels, and the availability of critical care facilities. Results: We received responses from 257 UK (response rate: 97.7%), 35 Australian (response rate: 32.7%), and 17 NZ (response rate: 94.4%) hospitals (total 309). Of these hospitals, 91.6% reported on-site ICU or HDU facilities. UK hospitals
Introduction:Orthogeriatric care models have been introduced within many health-care facilities to improve outcomes for hip fracture patients. This study aims to evaluate differences in care between 3 models, an orthopedic model, a geriatric model, and a comanaged model.Materials and Methods:A retrospective analysis was conducted for hip fracture patients treated at Western Health between November 2012 and March 2014. All patients aged 65 years or older were included in the analysis.Results:There were 183 patients in the orthopedic model, 137 in the geriatric model, and 126 in the comanaged model. Demographics and clinical characteristics were similar across the 3 models. Length of stay, mortality, and discharge destination were also consistent across the 3 groups. However, groups involving geriatricians were more likely to receive preoperative medical assessments, have greater recognition of postoperative medical problems, and have implementation of long-term osteoporosis management.Conclusion:The involvement of geriatricians in perioperative care models resulted in more comprehensive medical care without impacting length of stay, mortality, or discharge destination.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.