Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Content, accuracy and completeness of patient consent in a regional vascular surgery unit

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -) Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

Although the General Medical Council has published guidelines for procedural consent, there is evidence to suggest that deficiencies still occur in completion demographics, documentation of procedural risks and information regarding alternative therapies. We assessed the accuracy and completeness of vascular consent within our unit.

Methods

A retrospective review of patients undergoing vascular intervention between February 2010 and 2011 was performed. Patient chart examination included the analysis of consenting doctors’ grade, responsible vascular consultant, completeness of procedural entry, documentation of correct side, use of abbreviations, discussion of benefits and complications, additional information and overall legibility.

Results

323 patient consent forms were reviewed (male 203, mean age 68.0 years, elective surgery 241) including 50 AAA repairs, 27 carotid endarterectomies, 88 peripheral arterial reconstructions, 96 amputations and 69 elective varicose vein surgeries. 294 (91 %) consent forms were completed by a specialist registrar or above with 286 (88.5 %) forms having the responsible consultant documented. 85.4 % of patients were consented within 48 h of surgery. 245 (75.9 %) consent forms had legible printed names. However, only 75 (23.2 %) had a legible signature. 306 (94.7 %) consent forms had the procedure documented in full but 165 (51.0 %) had used abbreviations. 103 (31.9 %) had documentation of the intended benefits of surgery whilst 293 (90.7 %) had documentation of potential complications. Three patients had documented evidence of receiving written information and one patient received a copy of the consent form. Of those surveyed, procedural mortality was discussed in 62.5 % of open and 47.3 % of endovascular AAA repairs. Stroke was documented in 96.3 % of consent forms for carotid endarterectomy. Scarring was included most commonly in patients undergoing venous procedures.

Conclusion

Vascular consent is a complex process involving a number of discussions and meetings with patients. Our unit has demonstrated compliance of nearly 90 % for all consent-related processes and remains consistent with current GMC guidance. However, further improvement including the documentation of intended benefits, provision of additional written information whilst reducing the use of abbreviations is desired.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. General Medical Council (2008) Consent: patients and doctors making decisions together. http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/ethical_guidance/consent_guidance_index.asp. Last accessed 12 May 2014

  2. WHO-SEARO workshop (2007) Guidelines for medical record and clinical documentation. http://www.searo.who.int/LinkFiles/2007_Guidelines_for_Clinical_Doc.pdf. Last accessed 15 May 2013

  3. Crawford JR, Beresford TP, Lafferty KL (2001) The CRABEL score: a method for auditing medical records. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 83(1):65–68

    PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. The State of Queensland (Queensland Health) (2012). http://www.health.qld.gov.au/consent/html/sub_specialties/vascular.asp. Last accessed 12 May 2014

  5. Black SA, Nestle D, Tierney T, Amygbalos I, Kneebone R, Wolfe JHN (2009) Gaining consent for carotid surgery: a simulation-based study of vascular surgeons. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 37(2):1334–1339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Berman L, Curry L, Gusberg R, Dardik A, Fraenkel L (2008) Informed consent for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: the patient’s perspective. J Vasc Surg 48(2):296–302

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Houghton DJ, Williams S, Bennett JD, Back G, Jones AS (1997) Informed consent: patients’ and junior doctors’ perceptions of the consent procedure. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 22(6):515–518

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Carter K, Roake JA, Buckenham T, Frampton CM, Lewis DR (2008) Informed consent for vascular intervention: completing one audit loop. NZ Med J 121(1269):57–63

    Google Scholar 

  9. Soin B, Smellie WA, Thomson HJ (1993) Informed consent: a case for more education of the surgical team. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 75(1):62–65

    PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Temple-Doig L, Gordon M, Buckenham T, Roake J, Lewis D (2005) Informed consent for vascular intervention. N Z Med J 118(1221):U1630

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Intercollegiate Surgical Curriculum Programme. https://www.iscp.ac.uk/surgical/curr_intro.aspx. Last accessed 12 May 2014

  12. Department of Health (UK) (2001) Good practice in consent implementation guide: consent to examination or treatment. London: Department of Health publications. Available at http://www.dh.gov.uk/PolicyAndGuidance/HealthAndSocialCareTopics/Consent/ConsentGeneralInformation/fs/en. Last accessed 15 May 2013

  13. Palfreyman SJ, Drewery-Carter K, Rigby K, Michaels JA, Tod AM (2004) Varicose veins: a qualitative study to explore expectations and reasons for seeking treatment. J Clin Nurs 13(3):332–340

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Glenndinning E, Howard R (2007) Professional English in Use: Medicine. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  15. Berman L, Dardik A, Bradley EH, Gusberg RJ, Fraenkel L (2008) Informed consent for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: assessing variations in surgeon opinion through a national survey. J Vasc Surg 47(2):287–295

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Campbell B (2004) New consent forms issued by the Department of Health. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 86(6):457–458

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Langdon IJ, Hardin R, Learmonth ID (2002) Informed consent for total hip arthroplasty: does a written information sheet improve recall by patients? Ann R Coll Surg Engl 84(6):404–408

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge Ms. Bonnie Schimek from the Mayo Clinic who provided assistance with all the figures.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. E. O’Donnell.

Additional information

Association of Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland 2013 International Surgical Congress, Glasgow, UK, 1st–3rd May 2013 and Society for Clinical Vascular Surgery, California, United States, 18th–22nd March 2014.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

McGrogan, D., Mark, D., Lee, B. et al. Content, accuracy and completeness of patient consent in a regional vascular surgery unit. Ir J Med Sci 184, 521–529 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-014-1160-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-014-1160-x

Keywords

Navigation