Hostname: page-component-5db58dd55d-smskv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-08T03:45:45.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Informed consent: the assessment of two structured interview approaches compared to the current approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2007

P. J. D. Dawes ,
L. O'Keefe  and
S. Adcock
P. J. D. Dawes*
Affiliation:
Tutor Specialist, ENT Department, Dunedin Hospital, Dunedin, New Zealand.
L. O'Keefe
Affiliation:
Registrar, ENT Department, Manchester Royal Infirmary.
S. Adcock
Affiliation:
Registrar, Oral Surgery Department, Royal United Hospital, Bath.
*
P. J. D. Dawes, ENT Department, Freeman Hospital, Freeman Road, Newcastle upon Tyne.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We prospectively studied 190 patients undergoing tonsillectomy or nasal surgery to assess the value of two structured interview techniques. There were four groups: Group A did not have a consent interview during the study period. Group B had an informal interview. Group C had a structured interview and Group D had a structured interview and were given an information sheet. Anxiety assessments were made and patients' recall of the operation name, details of the operation and its complications was assessed.

Patients had higher than normal anxiety levels when admitted, but several hours after the interview anxiety was normal for Groups B, C and D. Group A maintained a higher anxiety level.

Only 37 per cent correctly recalled the operation name, where as 87 per cent of all groups recalled the explanation of the operation. However, Groups C and D recalled a higher mean number of complications per patient.

A structured interview when obtaining informed consent increases the number of complications recalled without increasing pre-operative anxiety.

Keywords

Informed consentInterviewsstructured

Information

Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 106 , Issue 5 , May 1992 , pp. 420 - 424
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

This work was presented to the Otolaryngological Research Society, 19 April 1991.

References

Aikin, R. C. B. (1969) Measurement of feelings using visual analogue analogue scales. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, 62: 989–993.Google Scholar
Antrobus, J. H. L. (1988) Anxiety and informed consent. Anaesthesia, 43: 267–269.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baczkowski, A. J. (1989) Anxiety and informed consent (letter). Anaesthesia, 44: 446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, D. J., Napier, A., Cushieri, A. (1988) How informed is signed consent? British Medical Journal, 296: 839–840.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cassileth, B. R., Supkiss, R. V., Sutton-Smith, K., March, V. (1980) Informed consent—why are it's goals imperfectly realized? New England Journal of Medicine, 302: 896–900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, L. C, Lasagna, L. (1969) Obtaining informed consent. Archives of Internal Medicine, 123: 682–688.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gibbs, S., Waters, W. E., George, C. F. (1990) Communicating information to patients about medicine. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 83: 292–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, K. D., Tyler, H. N. (1989) Informed consent for intravascular administration of contrast material: how much is enough? Radiology, 171: 509–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackenzie, J. W. (1989) Day case anaesthesia and anxiety. Anaesthesia, 44; 437–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maran, A. G. D. (1990) Informed consent in head and neck surgery. Clinical Otolaryngology, 15: 293–298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Medical Defence Union (1986) Consent to Treatment, Black Bear Press: Cambridge.Google Scholar
Morrison, A. W. (1990) [Silence in Court]. Twenty-one years of otolaryngology litigation. Journal of Laryngology and Otology, 104: 162–165.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muss, H. B., White, D. R., Michielutte, R., Richards, F., Cooper, M. R., Williams, S., Stuart, J. J., Spurr, C. L., (1979) Written informed consent in patients with breast cancer. Cancer, 43: 1549–1556.3.0.CO;2-R>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, G., Merav, A. (1976) Informed consent: recall by patients tested post-operatively. Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 22: 209–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, R. M. (1986) Informed consent: history, theory and practice. American Journal of Otology, 7: 82–88.Google ScholarPubMed
Simes, R. J., Tattersall, M. H. N., Coates, A. S., Raghavan, D., Solomon, H. J., Smartt, H. (1986) Randomized comparison of procedures for obtaining informed consent in clinical trials of treatment for cancer. British Medical Journal, 293: 1065–1068.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Villar, R. N., Hume, A. C. (1988) Informed orthopaedic consent: fact of fallacy? Journal of the Medical Defence Union, 4: 32–33.Google Scholar