Informed Consent: Are We Deluding Ourselves? A Randomized Controlled Study

Sahai, Amit; Murphy, Declan

doi:10.1111/j.1464-410x.2007.06516.x

Cited by 20 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[64] Med Care 2000Neuro/OrtUSA393Oral and written information vs. pc-based videopc-based videoChan et al. [61] Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002Ent/Gen surgCanada125Oral vs. oral and written information with figuresOral and written with figuresMason et al [69] BJOG 2003GynUK31Oral vs. oral and video informationOral and videoRossi et al [73] Arthroscopy 2005OrtUSA150Oral vs. oral and video informationOral and videoDanino et al [62] Plast Reconstr Surg 2006Plast SurgFrance60Oral vs. oral and video informationOral and videoMoseley et al [71] Br J Ophthalmol 2006OphUSA90Oral vs. oral and dia or video informationOral and dia or videoKeulers et al [66] Patient Educ Couns 2007Plast SurgNetherlands113Oral and written vs. pc-based informationpc-basedMasood et al [70] BJU Int 2007UroUK45Oral vs. oral and written informationOral onlyEggers et al [42] Obesity 2007…”

Section: Future Improvements Of Surgical Informed Consentmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of Surgical Informed Consent: Past, Present, and Future. A Quest to Help Patients Make Better Decisions

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundInformed consent (IC) is a process requiring a competent doctor, adequate transfer of information, and consent of the patient. It is not just a signature on a piece of paper. Current consent processes in surgery are probably outdated and may require major changes to adjust them to modern day legislation. A literature search may provide an opportunity for enhancing the quality of the surgical IC (SIC) process.MethodsRelevant English literature obtained from PubMed, Picarta, PsycINFO, and Google between 1993 and 2009 was reviewed.ResultsThe body of literature with respect to SIC is slim and of moderate quality. The SIC process is an underestimated part of surgery and neither surgeons nor patients sufficiently realize its importance. Surgeons are not specifically trained and lack the competence to guide patients through a legally correct SIC process. Computerized programs can support the SIC process significantly but are rarely used for this purpose.ConclusionsIC should be integrated into our surgical practice. Unfortunately, a big gap exists between the theoretical/legal best practice and the daily practice of IC. An optimally informed patient will have more realistic expectations regarding a surgical procedure and its associated risks. Well-informed patients will be more satisfied and file fewer legal claims. The use of interactive computer-based programs provides opportunities to improve the SIC process.

show abstract

Section: Future Improvements Of Surgical Informed Consentmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of Surgical Informed Consent: Past, Present, and Future. A Quest to Help Patients Make Better Decisions

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We read with great interest this recent commentary by Masood et al. [1] on informed consent. In their randomized study they concluded that adding written information about their surgical procedure did not improve the patients’ understanding compared with standard verbal consent.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%