Cargando…

Improving Surgical Informed Consent: Unanswered Questions

OBJECTIVE: This study reviews randomized clinical trials that have attempted to improve the process of informed consent. Consent should be guided by the ethical imperatives of autonomy, beneficence, and social justice. SUMMARY BACKGROUND: Informed consent is constantly evolving. Yet our review of th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Raper, Steven E., Clapp, Justin T., Fleisher, Lee A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10455139/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37638239
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AS9.0000000000000030
_version_ 1785096376333369344
author Raper, Steven E.
Clapp, Justin T.
Fleisher, Lee A.
author_facet Raper, Steven E.
Clapp, Justin T.
Fleisher, Lee A.
author_sort Raper, Steven E.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: This study reviews randomized clinical trials that have attempted to improve the process of informed consent. Consent should be guided by the ethical imperatives of autonomy, beneficence, and social justice. SUMMARY BACKGROUND: Informed consent is constantly evolving. Yet our review of the randomized trials done to improve the surgical informed consent process raises a number of questions: How does one define surgical informed consent? What interventions have been tried to measure and improve informed consent? Have the interventions in informed consent actually led to improvements? What efforts have been made to improve informed consent? And what steps can be taken to improve the process further? METHODS: A literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs)on informed consent identified 70 trials. Demographics, interventions, assessments, and a semi-quantitative summary of the findings were tabulated. The assessments done in the RCTs, show the surrogate for patient autonomy was comprehension; for beneficence, satisfaction and mental state (anxiety or depression); and, for social justice, language, literacy, learning needs, and cost. RESULTS: There were 4 basic categories of interventions: printed matter; non-interactive audiovisual tools; interactive multimedia; and a smaller group defying easy description. Improvement was documented in 46 of the 65 trials that studied comprehension. Thirteen of 33 trials showed improved satisfaction. Three of 30 studies showed an increase in anxiety. Few studies tried to assess primary language or literacy, and none looked at learning needs or cost. CONCLUSIONS: No single study improved all 3 principles of informed consent. Validated interventions and assessments were associated with greater impact on outcomes. All 3 ethical principles should be assessed; autonomy (as comprehension), beneficence (as satisfaction, anxiety), and social justice. Not enough consideration has been given to social justice; appropriate language translation, standardized reading levels, assessment of learning needs, and cost to the individual are all important elements worthy of future study.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10455139
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104551392023-08-26 Improving Surgical Informed Consent: Unanswered Questions Raper, Steven E. Clapp, Justin T. Fleisher, Lee A. Ann Surg Open Review Article OBJECTIVE: This study reviews randomized clinical trials that have attempted to improve the process of informed consent. Consent should be guided by the ethical imperatives of autonomy, beneficence, and social justice. SUMMARY BACKGROUND: Informed consent is constantly evolving. Yet our review of the randomized trials done to improve the surgical informed consent process raises a number of questions: How does one define surgical informed consent? What interventions have been tried to measure and improve informed consent? Have the interventions in informed consent actually led to improvements? What efforts have been made to improve informed consent? And what steps can be taken to improve the process further? METHODS: A literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs)on informed consent identified 70 trials. Demographics, interventions, assessments, and a semi-quantitative summary of the findings were tabulated. The assessments done in the RCTs, show the surrogate for patient autonomy was comprehension; for beneficence, satisfaction and mental state (anxiety or depression); and, for social justice, language, literacy, learning needs, and cost. RESULTS: There were 4 basic categories of interventions: printed matter; non-interactive audiovisual tools; interactive multimedia; and a smaller group defying easy description. Improvement was documented in 46 of the 65 trials that studied comprehension. Thirteen of 33 trials showed improved satisfaction. Three of 30 studies showed an increase in anxiety. Few studies tried to assess primary language or literacy, and none looked at learning needs or cost. CONCLUSIONS: No single study improved all 3 principles of informed consent. Validated interventions and assessments were associated with greater impact on outcomes. All 3 ethical principles should be assessed; autonomy (as comprehension), beneficence (as satisfaction, anxiety), and social justice. Not enough consideration has been given to social justice; appropriate language translation, standardized reading levels, assessment of learning needs, and cost to the individual are all important elements worthy of future study. Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. 2021-01-07 /pmc/articles/PMC10455139/ /pubmed/37638239 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AS9.0000000000000030 Text en Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Review Article
Raper, Steven E.
Clapp, Justin T.
Fleisher, Lee A.
Improving Surgical Informed Consent: Unanswered Questions
title Improving Surgical Informed Consent: Unanswered Questions
title_full Improving Surgical Informed Consent: Unanswered Questions
title_fullStr Improving Surgical Informed Consent: Unanswered Questions
title_full_unstemmed Improving Surgical Informed Consent: Unanswered Questions
title_short Improving Surgical Informed Consent: Unanswered Questions
title_sort improving surgical informed consent: unanswered questions
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10455139/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37638239
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AS9.0000000000000030
work_keys_str_mv AT raperstevene improvingsurgicalinformedconsentunansweredquestions
AT clappjustint improvingsurgicalinformedconsentunansweredquestions
AT fleisherleea improvingsurgicalinformedconsentunansweredquestions