Limits...
A survey on surgeons' perceived quality of the informed consent process in a Swiss paediatric surgery unit.

Guinand J, Gapany C, Simon JP, Wasserfallen JB, Joseph JM - Patient Saf Surg (2015)

Bottom Line: Most of them did not identify that the first aim of the informed consent form is to give the patient adequate information to allow him to base his consent, which is a legal obligation, the protection of physicians by the formalisation and proof of the informed consent being secondary.In the future, moving from informed consent process to shared decision-making, a more active bidirectional exchange may be strongly considered.Involving children in such vital decisions should become the norm while keeping in mind their level of maturity.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Peadiatric surgery Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Rue du Bugnon 46, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.

ABSTRACT

Aim: To evaluate the levels of satisfaction and opinions on the usefulness of the informed consent form currently in use in our Paediatric Surgery Department.

Design: Qualitative study carried out via interviews of senior paediatric surgeons, based on a questionnaire built up from reference criteria in the literature and public health law.

Results: Physicians with between 2 and 35 years experience of paediatric surgery, with a participation rate of 92 %, agreed on the definition of an informed consent form, were satisfied with the form in use and did not wish to modify its structure. The study revealed that signing the form was viewed as mandatory, but meant different things to different participants, who diverged over whom that signature protected. Finally, all respondents were in agreement over what information was necessary for parents of children requiring surgery.

Conclusion: Paediatric surgeons seemed to be satisfied with the informed consent form in use. Most of them did not identify that the first aim of the informed consent form is to give the patient adequate information to allow him to base his consent, which is a legal obligation, the protection of physicians by the formalisation and proof of the informed consent being secondary. Few surgeons brought up the fact that the foremost stakeholder in paediatric surgery are the children themselves and that their opinions are not always sought. In the future, moving from informed consent process to shared decision-making, a more active bidirectional exchange may be strongly considered. Involving children in such vital decisions should become the norm while keeping in mind their level of maturity.

No MeSH data available.


Information deemed to be given by surgeons before operation
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4552157&req=5

Fig2: Information deemed to be given by surgeons before operation

Mentions: The necessity to inform about diagnosis, prognosis, advantages and disadvantages, possible alternative treatments, and intra- and postoperative risks were mentioned by all respondents. More than 25 % of respondents stated that a list of every potential risk should not be given because it may cause unnecessary anxiety to patients/parents and bias overall fact retention. Ten out of eleven (90 %) raised the necessity of mentioning risk of death even if it is only brought up in cases of extremely risky operations. The length of surgery was mentioned by four surgeons (36 %). None of them mentioned the cost of the operation (table below). Economic aspects were never brought up as even the surgeon did not know the final cost of a given operation (Fig. 2).Fig. 2


A survey on surgeons' perceived quality of the informed consent process in a Swiss paediatric surgery unit.

Guinand J, Gapany C, Simon JP, Wasserfallen JB, Joseph JM - Patient Saf Surg (2015)

Information deemed to be given by surgeons before operation
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4552157&req=5

Fig2: Information deemed to be given by surgeons before operation
Mentions: The necessity to inform about diagnosis, prognosis, advantages and disadvantages, possible alternative treatments, and intra- and postoperative risks were mentioned by all respondents. More than 25 % of respondents stated that a list of every potential risk should not be given because it may cause unnecessary anxiety to patients/parents and bias overall fact retention. Ten out of eleven (90 %) raised the necessity of mentioning risk of death even if it is only brought up in cases of extremely risky operations. The length of surgery was mentioned by four surgeons (36 %). None of them mentioned the cost of the operation (table below). Economic aspects were never brought up as even the surgeon did not know the final cost of a given operation (Fig. 2).Fig. 2

Bottom Line: Most of them did not identify that the first aim of the informed consent form is to give the patient adequate information to allow him to base his consent, which is a legal obligation, the protection of physicians by the formalisation and proof of the informed consent being secondary.In the future, moving from informed consent process to shared decision-making, a more active bidirectional exchange may be strongly considered.Involving children in such vital decisions should become the norm while keeping in mind their level of maturity.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Peadiatric surgery Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Rue du Bugnon 46, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.

ABSTRACT

Aim: To evaluate the levels of satisfaction and opinions on the usefulness of the informed consent form currently in use in our Paediatric Surgery Department.

Design: Qualitative study carried out via interviews of senior paediatric surgeons, based on a questionnaire built up from reference criteria in the literature and public health law.

Results: Physicians with between 2 and 35 years experience of paediatric surgery, with a participation rate of 92 %, agreed on the definition of an informed consent form, were satisfied with the form in use and did not wish to modify its structure. The study revealed that signing the form was viewed as mandatory, but meant different things to different participants, who diverged over whom that signature protected. Finally, all respondents were in agreement over what information was necessary for parents of children requiring surgery.

Conclusion: Paediatric surgeons seemed to be satisfied with the informed consent form in use. Most of them did not identify that the first aim of the informed consent form is to give the patient adequate information to allow him to base his consent, which is a legal obligation, the protection of physicians by the formalisation and proof of the informed consent being secondary. Few surgeons brought up the fact that the foremost stakeholder in paediatric surgery are the children themselves and that their opinions are not always sought. In the future, moving from informed consent process to shared decision-making, a more active bidirectional exchange may be strongly considered. Involving children in such vital decisions should become the norm while keeping in mind their level of maturity.

No MeSH data available.