Skip to main content
Log in

Consent documentation for elective orthopaedic surgery

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

Abstract

Objectives

Currently in Ireland, there is a lack of uniformity regarding the method in which the consent process is routinely documented. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the standard consent forms used in elective orthopaedic hospitals in Ireland. In addition, this paper explores the relevant guidelines from the UK and Ireland relating to consent documentation.

Methods

Standard consent forms used in the 24 public hospitals that perform elective orthopaedic surgery were analysed and compared, based on the inclusion or exclusion of 22 unique consent-related items or statements selected by the authors. In addition, each form was analysed for format, word count, and readability.

Results

Within 24 hospitals with elective orthopaedic surgery, there were 21 unique consent forms being used. There was a mean inclusion of 9.5 of the 22 unique items per form with a standard deviation of 5.1 (range 2–18), indicating a wide discrepancy. For each unique consent-related item in the analysis, the mean rate of inclusion was 43.4% (SD 26.7%). The mean Flesch Reading Ease Score was 43.3. The format varied from 1 to 4 pages, with a word count of 109 to 1041 (mean 414.7).

Conclusion

The findings demonstrate a lack of uniformity of both format and content amongst the consent forms currently being used in elective orthopaedic hospitals in Ireland. This paper supports the use of a nationally standardised consent documentation method in order to improve the efficiency of the consent process and ensure greater protection against litigation.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Atrey A, Gupte CM, Corbett SA (2010) Review of successful litigation against English health trusts in the treatment of adults with orthopaedic pathology: clinical governance lessons learned. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92(18):e36

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bhattacharyya T, Yeon H, Harris MB (2005) The medical-legal aspects of informed consent in orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(11):2395–2400

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Skene L, Smallwood R (2002) Informed consent: lessons from Australia. BMJ (Clin Res Ed) 324(7328):39–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Tarantino U, Giai Via A, Macri E, Eramo A, Marino V, Marsella LT (2013) Professional liability in orthopaedics and traumatology in Italy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471(10):3349–3357

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Beresford-Cleary NJ, Halliday J, Breusch SJ, Biant LC (2011) Consent process for elective total hip and knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 19(3):274–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Murphy K, Shafiq A, Corrigan MA, Redmond HP (2011) A descriptive study of consent documentation. Ir Med J 104(8):238–240

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. National Consent Policy (2014), http://www.hse.ie/eng/about/Who/qualityandpatientsafety/National_Consent_Policy (last accessed 01/02/17)

  8. Reference Guide to Consent for Examination or Treatment (Second Edition), Department of Health UK, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/reference-guide-to-consent-for-examination-or-treatment-second-edition (last accessed 01/02/17)

  9. Khan IH, Jamil W, Lynn SM, Khan OH, Markland K, Giddins G (2012) Analysis of NHSLA claims in orthopedic surgery. Orthopedics 35(5):e726–e731

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Foy MA (2015) Informed consent: where are we in 2015? Bone Joint J 97-b(9):1159–1161

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board (2015). UKSC 11 (On appeal from (2013) CSIH 3; (2010) CSIH 104)

  12. Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee (1957). 1 WLR 582, 587

  13. Guide to Professional Conduct and Ethics for Medical Practitioners 8th Edition (2016), Irish Medical Council, https://www.medicalcouncil.ie/News-and-Publications/Reports/Guide-to-Professional-Conduct-and-Ethics-8th-Edition-2016-.pdf (last accessed 01/02/17)

  14. National policy and procedure for safe surgery, http://www.hse.ie/eng/about/Who/qualityandpatientsafety/safepatientcare/Safe_Surgery (last accessed 01/02/17)

  15. Consent: patients and doctors making decisions together, General Medical Council, http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/ethical_guidance/consent_guidance_index.asp (last accessed 01/02/17)

  16. Clarke K, O'Loughlin P, Cashman J (2015) Standardized Consent: The Effect of Information Sheets on Information Retention. J Patient Saf. https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000230

  17. Ibrahim T, Ong SM, Taylor GJ (2004) The new consent form: is it any better? Ann R Coll Surg Engl 86(3):206–209

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Shurnas PS, Coughlin MJ (2003) Recall of the risks of forefoot surgery after informed consent. Foot Ankle Int 24(12):904–908

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Crepeau AE, McKinney BI, Fox-Ryvicker M, Castelli J, Penna J, Wang ED (2011) Prospective evaluation of patient comprehension of informed consent. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93(19):e114 (1–7)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lemaire R (2006) Informed consent–a contemporary myth? J Bone Joint Surg Br Vol 88(1):2–7

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Saigal R, Clark AJ, Scheer JK, Smith JS, Bess S, Mummaneni PV, McCarthy IM, Hart RA, Kebaish KM, Klineberg EO, Deviren V, Schwab F, Shaffrey CI, Ames CP (2015) Adult spinal deformity patients recall fewer than 50% of the risks discussed in the informed consent process preoperatively and the recall rate worsens significantly in the postoperative period. Spine 40(14):1079–1085

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Robinson G, Merav A (1976) Informed consent: recall by patients tested postoperatively. Ann Thorac Surg 22(3):209–212

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Mussa MA, Sweed TA, Khan A (2014) Informed consent documentation for total hip and knee replacement using generic forms with blank spaces. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 22(2):214-217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Singh S, Mayahi R (2004) Consent in orthopaedic surgery. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 86(5):339–341

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Jeyaseelan L, Ward J, Papanna M, Sundararajan S (2010) Quality of consent form completion in orthopaedics: are we just going through the motions? J Med Ethics 36(7):407–408

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kheiran A, Banerjee P, Stott P (2014) Consenting operative orthopaedic trauma patients: challenges and solutions. ISRN Surgery 2014:354239

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Isherwood J, Dean B, Pandit H (2013) Documenting informed consent in elective hip replacement surgery: a simple change in practice. Br J Hosp Med (Lond) 74(4):224-227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Barritt AW, Clark L, Teoh V, Cohen AM, Gibb PA (2010) Assessing the adequacy of procedure-specific consent forms in orthopaedic surgery against current methods of operative consent. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 92(3):246–249 quiz 2p following 9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Atrey A, Leslie I, Carvell J, Gupte C, Shepperd JA, Powell J et al (2008) Standardised consent forms on the website of the British Orthopaedic Association. J Bone Joint Surg Br Vol 90(4):422–423

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Chatterton V. Gerson (1981) QB 432

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert M. Kenyon.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Author Robert Kenyon declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Author Eoghan Pomeroy declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Author Robert Yeo declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Author James Cashman declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kenyon, R.M., Pomeroy, E., Yeo, R. et al. Consent documentation for elective orthopaedic surgery. Ir J Med Sci 188, 861–866 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-018-1929-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-018-1929-4

Keywords

Navigation