Cargando…

Informed consent in refractive surgery: in-person vs telemedicine approach

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the quality of consent process in refractive surgery between patients who had a preoperative consent discussion with the surgeon using a telemedicine approach and those who had a face-to-face discussion. METHODS: Patients treated between January and Dece...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schallhorn, Steven C, Hannan, Stephen J, Teenan, David, Pelouskova, Martina, Schallhorn, Julie M
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6278698/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30568424
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S183249
_version_ 1783378413998833664
author Schallhorn, Steven C
Hannan, Stephen J
Teenan, David
Pelouskova, Martina
Schallhorn, Julie M
author_facet Schallhorn, Steven C
Hannan, Stephen J
Teenan, David
Pelouskova, Martina
Schallhorn, Julie M
author_sort Schallhorn, Steven C
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the quality of consent process in refractive surgery between patients who had a preoperative consent discussion with the surgeon using a telemedicine approach and those who had a face-to-face discussion. METHODS: Patients treated between January and December 2017 (8,184 laser vision correction [LVC] and 3,754 refractive lens exchange [RLE] patients) that attended day 1 and 1-month postoperative visit were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative consent preparation included a consultation with an optometrist, observation of an educational video, and written information. Patients then selected either a face-to-face appointment with their surgeon (in-clinic group) or a telemedicine appointment (remote group) for their consent discussion, according to their preference. Patient experience questionnaire and clinical data were included in a multivariate model to explore factors associated with consent quality. RESULTS: Prior to surgery, 80.1% of LVC and 47.9% of RLE patients selected remote consent. Of all LVC patients, 97.5% of in-clinic and 98.3% of remote patients responded that they were adequately consented for surgery (P=0.04). Similar percentages in the RLE group were 97.6% for in-clinic and 97.9% for remote patients (P=0.47). In a multivariate model, the major predictor of patient’s satisfaction with the consent process was postoperative satisfaction with visual acuity, responsible for 80.4% of variance explained by the model. Other significant contributors were postoperative visual phenomena and dry eyes, difficulty with night driving, close-up and distance vision, postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity, change in corrected distance visual acuity, and satisfaction with the surgeon’s approach. The type of consent (remote or in-clinic) had no impact on patient’s perception of consent quality in the regression model. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients opted for telemedicine-assisted consent. Those who chose it were equally satisfied as those who had a face-to-face meeting with their surgeon. Dissatisfaction with surgical outcome was the major factor affecting patient’s perception of consent quality, regardless of the method of their consent.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6278698
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62786982018-12-19 Informed consent in refractive surgery: in-person vs telemedicine approach Schallhorn, Steven C Hannan, Stephen J Teenan, David Pelouskova, Martina Schallhorn, Julie M Clin Ophthalmol Original Research PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the quality of consent process in refractive surgery between patients who had a preoperative consent discussion with the surgeon using a telemedicine approach and those who had a face-to-face discussion. METHODS: Patients treated between January and December 2017 (8,184 laser vision correction [LVC] and 3,754 refractive lens exchange [RLE] patients) that attended day 1 and 1-month postoperative visit were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative consent preparation included a consultation with an optometrist, observation of an educational video, and written information. Patients then selected either a face-to-face appointment with their surgeon (in-clinic group) or a telemedicine appointment (remote group) for their consent discussion, according to their preference. Patient experience questionnaire and clinical data were included in a multivariate model to explore factors associated with consent quality. RESULTS: Prior to surgery, 80.1% of LVC and 47.9% of RLE patients selected remote consent. Of all LVC patients, 97.5% of in-clinic and 98.3% of remote patients responded that they were adequately consented for surgery (P=0.04). Similar percentages in the RLE group were 97.6% for in-clinic and 97.9% for remote patients (P=0.47). In a multivariate model, the major predictor of patient’s satisfaction with the consent process was postoperative satisfaction with visual acuity, responsible for 80.4% of variance explained by the model. Other significant contributors were postoperative visual phenomena and dry eyes, difficulty with night driving, close-up and distance vision, postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity, change in corrected distance visual acuity, and satisfaction with the surgeon’s approach. The type of consent (remote or in-clinic) had no impact on patient’s perception of consent quality in the regression model. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients opted for telemedicine-assisted consent. Those who chose it were equally satisfied as those who had a face-to-face meeting with their surgeon. Dissatisfaction with surgical outcome was the major factor affecting patient’s perception of consent quality, regardless of the method of their consent. Dove Medical Press 2018-11-29 /pmc/articles/PMC6278698/ /pubmed/30568424 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S183249 Text en © 2018 Schallhorn et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Original Research
Schallhorn, Steven C
Hannan, Stephen J
Teenan, David
Pelouskova, Martina
Schallhorn, Julie M
Informed consent in refractive surgery: in-person vs telemedicine approach
title Informed consent in refractive surgery: in-person vs telemedicine approach
title_full Informed consent in refractive surgery: in-person vs telemedicine approach
title_fullStr Informed consent in refractive surgery: in-person vs telemedicine approach
title_full_unstemmed Informed consent in refractive surgery: in-person vs telemedicine approach
title_short Informed consent in refractive surgery: in-person vs telemedicine approach
title_sort informed consent in refractive surgery: in-person vs telemedicine approach
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6278698/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30568424
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S183249
work_keys_str_mv AT schallhornstevenc informedconsentinrefractivesurgeryinpersonvstelemedicineapproach
AT hannanstephenj informedconsentinrefractivesurgeryinpersonvstelemedicineapproach
AT teenandavid informedconsentinrefractivesurgeryinpersonvstelemedicineapproach
AT pelouskovamartina informedconsentinrefractivesurgeryinpersonvstelemedicineapproach
AT schallhornjuliem informedconsentinrefractivesurgeryinpersonvstelemedicineapproach