Patient Reported Experience on Consenting for Surgery- Elective Versus Emergency Patients

Introduction: Informed consent for surgery is a medical and legal requirement, but completing these does not necessarily translate to high patient satisfaction. This patient-reported experience study aimed to examine the surgical consent process, comparing the patients' experience in elective and emergency settings. Methods: Over a 6-mo period, postoperative patients at The Alfred Hospital Breast and Endocrine Surgical Unit were invited to participate in a survey on the surgical consent process -including perceived priorities, information provided and overall experience. Standard statistical techniques were used, with a significant P-value of < 0.05. Results: A total of 412 patients were invited, with 130 (32%) responses. More patients underwent elective surgery ( N = 90, 69%) than emergency surgery ( N = 40, 31%). Emergency patients were more likely to sign the consent form regardless of its contents (93% versus 39%, P < 0.001) and more likely to be influenced by external pressures (63% versus 1%, P < 0.001). Elective patients were more likely to want to discuss their surgery with a senior surgeon (74% versus 23%, P < 0.001) and more likely to seek advice from external sources (83% versus 10%, P < 0.001). Both groups highly valued the opportunity to ask questions (67% versus 63%, P = 0.65). Conclusion: This study shows patients have a range of different priorities in preparation for surgery. Therefore, each consent process should be patient-specific, and focus on providing the patient with quality resources that inform decision-making. (c) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Automated summary

The study found that patients have different priorities when preparing for surgery, and therefore, the consent process should be tailored to each patient and focus on providing quality resources to aid decision-making.