What do patients want? Surgical informed‐consent and patient‐centered care – An augmented model of information disclosure
Original Article
Gillie Gabay, Yaarit Bokek‐Cohen
Bioethics, 2 December 2019 
Abstract
The ideal moral standard for surgical informed‐consent calls upon surgeons to carry out a disclosure dialogue with patients so they have as full as possible an understanding of the procedure before they sign the informed‐consent form. This study is the first to empirically explore patient preferences regarding disclosure dialogue. Twelve Israelis who underwent life‐saving surgeries participated in a narrative study. Three themes emerged from the analysis: objectification of patients, anxiety provoking processes and information, and lack of information that was essential for patients. Findings contribute to existing debates among surgeons regarding the scope and importance of some disclosure components. Analysis led to our formulation of an augmented subjective model of information disclosure that participants prefer, which extends beyond the immediate present of the surgery to the period after discharge, and until return to routine. Surgeons should be aware of patient preferences in disclosure, and gaps between perceptions of surgeons, and preferences and needs of patients.

Perception and confidence of medical students in informed consent: A core EPA
Tiffany N. Anderson, Lauren R. Aalami, Edmund W. Lee, Sylvia Bereknyei Merrell, Michael D. Sgroi, Dana T. Lin, James N. Lau
Surgery, 24 December 2019
Abstract
Background
Informed consent discussions have been identified as a core entrustable professional activity for medical students by the Association of American Medical Colleges. Medical students, however, rarely receive formal instruction on how to appropriately conduct informed consent discussions before residency, resulting in inconsistent levels of experience and deficiencies in performance. This study explores medical students’ understanding of the elements of informed consent discussions and their readiness to perform a comprehensive informed consent discussion.
Methods
Using expert consensus, cognitive interviews, and piloting, we iteratively developed a 15-item survey aligned with entrustable professional activity guidelines concerning informed consent discussions consisting of multiple choice, free text, and 5-point Likert-type questions. The instrument covered domains of experience, confidence, medical-legal knowledge, and recall of informed consent discussion elements. The full survey was distributed anonymously to undergraduate medical students at our institution. An abbreviated survey was administered to postgraduate students who were new interns at our institution. Responses were analyzed quantitatively using descriptive statistics. The free text data were coded for inclusion in this analysis.
Results
A total of 75 undergraduate medical students across all years responded (response rate [RR] = 86%), and 34 (RR = 77%) of the postgraduate students who were new interns participated. A total of 45 (75%) undergraduate medical students reported no training on informed consent discussions, and 9 (15%) undergraduate medical students had never witnessed an informed consent discussion. The undergraduate medical students agreed that informed consent discussions could be legally performed by residents and advance practice providers but were unsure whether the same applied to medical students. On a 5-point scale (anchored to “Not at all,” “Somewhat,” and “Extremely”), they were “somewhat confident” in their ability to perform an informed consent discussion. When asked to list the 7 elements of an informed consent discussion, 2 undergraduate medical students (3%) were able to identify all the elements. Although 3 undergraduate medical students (9%) had experience leading an informed consent discussion and 11 (32%) reported formal instruction in informed consent, the ability (3.7 ± 0.9 standard deviation [SD]) of the postgraduate students who were new interns to recall the 7 elements was similar to that of the undergraduate medical students (3.4 ± 1.2 SD); P = .31.
Conclusion
These findings suggest that undergraduate medical students and postgraduate students who are new interns are not confident or competent in their ability to perform an appropriate informed consent discussion. Our study findings support the creation of a needs-based, entrustable professional activity–aligned informed consent discussion teaching program and the need for an ongoing evaluation of the success of such a program.

Association Between the Communication Skills of Physicians and the Signing of Do-Not-Resuscitate Consent for Terminally Ill Patients in Emergency Rooms (Cross-Sectional Study)          
Original Research
Chih-Hung Chen, Ya-Hui Cheng, Fen-Ju Chen, Eng-Yen Huang, Po-Ming Liu, Chia-Te Kung, Chao-Hui Su, Shu-Hwa Chen, Peng-Chen Chien, Ching-Hua Hsieh
Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, 11 December 2019; 12 pp 307—315
Abstract
Background
The signing of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) consent is mandatory in providing a palliative approach in the end-of-life care for the terminally ill patients and requires an effective communication between the physician and the patients or their family members. This study aimed to investigate the association between the communication skills of physicians who participated in the SHARE (supportive environment, how to deliver the bad news, additional information, reassurance, and emotional support) model course on the patient notification and the signing of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) consent by the terminally ill patients at emergency rooms.
Methods
Between May 1, 2017 and April 30, 2018, a total of 109 terminally ill patients were enrolled in this study, of which 70 had signed a DNR and 39 had not. Data regarding the patients’ medical records, a questionnaire survey completed by family members, and patient observation forms were used for the assessment of physicians’ communication skills during patient notification. The observation form was designed based on the SHARE model. A multivariate logistic regression model was applied to identify the independent significant factors of the patient and family member variables as well as the four main components of the observation form.
Results
The results revealed that knowing how to convey bad news and providing reassurance and emotional support were significantly correlated with a higher rate of signing DNR consent. Additionally, physician-initiated discussion with family members and a predicted limited life expectancy were negative independent significant factors for signing DNR consent.
Conclusion
This study revealed that good communication skills help to increase the signing of DNR consent. The learning of such skills from attendance of the SHARE model course is encouraged for the physicians in the palliative care of terminally ill patients in an emergency room.

Informed consent for anaesthesia: Presential or non-presential information?
Faura A, Izquierdo E, Escriche L, Nogué G, Videla S
Journal of Healthcare Quality Research, 21 Nov 2019
Abstract
Introduction
The anaesthesia informed consent (AIC) is a process of communication between a clinician and a patient that results in the patient agreeing to undergo a specific anaesthetic procedure after understanding all the information needed to make a free, voluntary and conscious decision. This information is traditionally given during a face-to-face pre-operative visit.
Objective
To evaluate patient perceptions when they receive the information about AIC, face-to-face or by phone.
Patients and Methods
A single centre, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group pilot clinical trial was conducted on patients > 18 years of age undergoing major ambulatory surgery procedures with a surgical complexity that did not require a face-to-face pre-operative visit. Patients were randomly assigned to be informed by telephone (experimental group) or in a face-to-face visit (control group). Fifteen days after the surgery a questionnaire was used to gather patient perceptions in understanding the anaesthetic procedure and risks, autonomy (to ask for explanations), as well as and satisfaction.
Results
Of the 160 patients that gave their consent, 142 were interviewed: 70 from the experimental group and 72 from the control group. Both groups were comparable in age, gender, anaesthetic risk, and surgical complexity. The percentage of patients that understood the information provided on the anaesthetic technique was 71% and 81%, respectively (P=.429); on its risks: 67% and 69% (P=.951); autonomy: 56% and 74% (P=.036) and satisfaction rate: 46% and 46% (P=.835).
Conclusion
There is no difference between the groups in the level of understanding of the information that the patient perceives and the level of satisfaction. Nevertheless, almost half of them did not remember to have been given the possibility to clear-up doubts.

Compassionate and Clinical Behavior of Residents in a Simulated Informed Consent Encounter
Waisel DB, Ruben MA, Blanch-Hartigan D, Hall JA, Meyer EC, Blum RH
Anesthesiology, 20 November 2019
Abstract 
What We Know About This Topic
Compassionate behavior in clinicians includes understanding patients’ psychosocial, physical, and medical needs; promptly attending to needs; and engaging patients to the extent they wish.
What This Article Will Tell Us That Is New
The investigators evaluated compassionate behavior of anesthesia residents in a simulated preoperative encounter with a patient in pain before urgent surgery. Anesthesia residents had variable and, at times, flawed recognition of patient cues, responsiveness to patient cues, pain management, and patient interactions.
Background
Compassionate behavior in clinicians is described as seeking to understand patients’ psychosocial, physical and medical needs, timely attending to these needs, and involving patients as they desire. The goal of our study was to evaluate compassionate behavior in patient interactions, pain management, and the informed consent process of anesthesia residents in a simulated preoperative evaluation of a patient in pain scheduled for urgent surgery.
Methods
Forty-nine Clinical Anesthesia residents in year 1 and 16 Clinical Anesthesia residents in year 3 from three residency programs individually obtained informed consent for anesthesia for an urgent laparotomy from a standardized patient complaining of pain. Encounters were assessed for ordering pain medication, for patient-resident interactions by using the Empathic Communication Coding System to code responses to pain and nausea cues, and for the content of the informed consent discussion.
Results
Of the 65 residents, 56 (86%) ordered pain medication, at an average of 4.2 min (95% CI, 3.2 to 5.1) into the encounter; 9 (14%) did not order pain medication. Resident responses to the cues averaged between perfunctory recognition and implicit recognition (mean, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.6 to 1.9]) in the 0 (less empathic) to 6 (more empathic) system. Responses were lower for residents who did not order pain medication (mean, 1.2 [95% CI, 0.8 to 1.6]) and similar for those who ordered medication before informed consent signing (mean, 1.9 [95% CI, 1.6 to 2.1]) and after signing (mean, 1.9 [95% CI, 1.6 to 2.0]; F (2, 62) = 4.21; P = 0.019; partial η = 0.120). There were significant differences between residents who ordered pain medication before informed consent and those who did not order pain medication and between residents who ordered pain medication after informed consent signing and those who did not.
Conclusion
In a simulated preoperative evaluation, anesthesia residents have variable and, at times, flawed recognition of patient cues, responsiveness to patient cues, pain management, and patient interactions.