Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Knee arthroscopy prospective observational study of patient information

  • Original Article • KNEE - ARTHROSCOPY
  • Published:
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Arthroscopy is especially well suited to outpatient implementation, as procedures are less heavy for the patient. Few studies, however, have focused on patient information and understanding in arthroscopic and outpatient surgery. The aim of the present study was to perform a prospective assessment of the information received by the patient concerning outpatient arthroscopic surgery. The study hypothesis was that there is room for improvement in information.

Materials and methods

A prospective descriptive observational cohort study was made of the means of information available to patients, their understanding of arthroscopic surgery and their satisfaction with the information delivered. Inclusion criteria consisted in scheduled outpatient arthroscopic surgery in whatever joint.

Results

Fifty consecutive patients responded to the study questionnaire. Forty-eight (96%) considered that the surgeon had provided sufficient oral information. Twenty-nine (58%) considered that they had received sufficient written information. Forty-four (88%) reported searching on the Internet. Twelve (24%) had sought testimony and advice from someone who had undergone similar surgery. Eighteen (36%) had sought information from their community physician. Four (8%) had called back or taken a new appointment with the surgeon to get more information. Five (10%) attributed lack of information to lack of time in the preoperative consultation. Three (6%) considered the information to have been too technical for good understanding of the procedure.

Discussion

The present study showed that this cohort, which was relatively young compared to patients undergoing implantation, was notably autonomous in their search for information. They mainly sought information in general-public medical information websites, rather than from their community physician or specialist.

Conclusion

It is important to improve patient information, and specific tools should be implemented ahead of outpatient arthroscopic surgery.

Level of evidence

Four observational studies.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kim S, Bosque J, Meehan JP et al (2011) Increase in outpatient knee arthroscopy in the United States: a comparison of National Surveys of Ambulatory Surgery, 1996 and 2006. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93:994–1000. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.I.01618

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Elvir-Lazo OL, White PF (2010) Postoperative pain management after ambulatory surgery: role of multimodal analgesia. Anesthesiol Clin 28:217–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anclin.2010.02.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hsu LP, Oh S, Nuber GW et al (2013) Nerve block of the infrapatellar branch of the saphenous nerve in knee arthroscopy: a prospective, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 95:1465–1472. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.L.01534

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Erivan R, Chaput T, Villatte G et al (2018) Ten-year epidemiological study in an orthopaedic and trauma surgery centre: are there risks involved in increasing scheduled arthroplasty volume without increasing resources? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res OTSR. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2018.08.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Greene KA, Wyman AM, Scott LA et al (2017) Evaluation of patient preparedness for surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 217:179.e1–179.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.04.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chan Y, Irish JC, Wood SJ et al (2002) Patient education and informed consent in head and neck surgery. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 128:1269–1274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bowers N, Eisenberg E, Montbriand J et al (2017) Using a multimedia presentation to improve patient understanding and satisfaction with informed consent for minimally invasive vascular procedures. Surg J R Coll Surg Edinb Irel 15:7–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surge.2015.09.001

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Mednick Z, Irrcher I, Hopman WM, Sharma S (2016) Assessing a narrated white board animation as part of the consent process for intravenous fluorescein angiography: a randomized educational study. Can J Ophthalmol J Can Ophtalmol 51:471–475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjo.2016.04.023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. McCormack D, Evoy D, Mulcahy D, Walsh M (1997) An evaluation of patients comprehension of orthopaedic terminology: implications for informed consent. J R Coll Surg Edinb 42:33–35

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. McDonald S, Page MJ, Beringer K et al (2014) Preoperative education for hip or knee replacement. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003526.pub3

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Billon L, Décaudin B, Pasquier G et al (2017) Prospective assessment of patients’ knowledge and informational needs and of surgeon-to-patient information transfer before and after knee or hip arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res OTSR 103:1161–1167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2017.08.012

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Marcus-Steiff J, Desabie J (1966) Théorie et pratique des sondages. Rev Fr Sociol 7:403

    Google Scholar 

  13. Nakano N, Khanduja V (2016) Complications in hip arthroscopy. Muscles Ligaments Tendons J 6:402–409. https://doi.org/10.11138/mltj/2016.6.3.402

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Gupte CM, Hassan ANA, McDermott ID, Thomas RD (2002) The internet–friend or foe? A questionnaire study of orthopaedic out-patients. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 84:187–192

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Cassidy JT, Baker JF (2016) Orthopaedic patient information on the world wide web: an essential review. J Bone Joint Surg Am 98:325–338. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.N.01189

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Davidson AR, Loftis CM, Throckmorton TW, Kelly DM (2016) Accessibility and availability of online information for orthopedic surgery residency programs. Iowa Orthop J 36:31–36

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Cornoiu A, Beischer AD, Donnan L et al (2011) Multimedia patient education to assist the informed consent process for knee arthroscopy. ANZ J Surg 81:176–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-2197.2010.05487.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Egekeze N, Dubin J, Williams K, Bernhardt M (2016) The age of orthoinfo: a randomized controlled trial evaluating patient comprehension of informed consent. J Bone Joint Surg Am 98:e81. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.15.01291

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Larobina ME, Merry CJ, Negri JC, Pick AW (2007) Is informed consent in cardiac surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention achievable? ANZ J Surg 77:530–534. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-2197.2007.04143.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Coudane H, Mangin M, Karam Y et al (2017) The concept of a waiting period for preoperative patient consent: prospective study of 51 shoulder arthroscopy cases. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res OTSR 103:791–794. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2017.03.025

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Michalski A, Stopa M, Miśkowiak B (2016) Use of multimedia technology in the doctor-patient relationship for obtaining patient informed consent. Med Sci Monit Int Med J Exp Clin Res 22:3994–3999. https://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.894147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Madan S, Kulkarni S, Friedrichs I, Barrett DS (2001) Patients’ recollection of day case knee arthroscopy procedure. Bull Hosp Jt Dis N Y N 60:76–79

    Google Scholar 

  23. Gleyze P, Coudane H (2016) Patient information in orthopedic and trauma surgery. Fundamental knowledge, legal aspects and practical recommendations. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 102:S105–S111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2015.06.028

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Agout C, Rosset P, Druon J et al (2017) Epidemiology of malpractice claims in the orthopedic and trauma surgery department of a French teaching hospital: a 10-year retrospective study. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res OTSR. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2017.11.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Université Clermont Auvergne, CHU Clermont-Ferrand, CNRS, SIGMA Clermont, ICCF, 63000, Clermont-Ferrand, France

    Roger Erivan, Guillaume Villatte, Stéphane Descamps & Stéphane Boisgard

  2. Université Clermont Auvergne, CHU Clermont-Ferrand, 63000, Clermont-Ferrand, France

    Victoria Volkova & Emilien Engels

  3. Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery Department, Hôpital Gabriel Montpied, CHU de Clermont Ferrand, BP 69, 63003, Clermont-Ferrand, France

    Roger Erivan

Authors
  1. Roger Erivan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Victoria Volkova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Guillaume Villatte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Emilien Engels
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Stéphane Descamps
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Stéphane Boisgard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

RE was involved in study design, investigations, article writing and surgery. VV was involved in investigations and article writing. GV was involved in article writing and surgery. EE was involved in study design, investigations, article writing and surgery. SD was involved in study design, reediting, surgery and supervision. SB was involved in study design, reediting, surgery and supervision.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roger Erivan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

SB is a consultant for Zimmer, outside of the present study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Erivan, R., Volkova, V., Villatte, G. et al. Knee arthroscopy prospective observational study of patient information. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 29, 1495–1500 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-019-02447-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-019-02447-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation