-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Patient satisfaction with the consent discussion is not improved by showing patients their computed tomography or angiography images before they undergo vascular surgery.
- Dominic LeBlanc, Adam H Power, Guy DeRose, Audra Duncan, and Luc Dubois.
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
- J. Vasc. Surg. 2018 Nov 1; 68 (5): 1517-1523.e3.
ObjectivePatient-based decision aids and other multimedia tools have been developed to help enrich the preoperative discussion between surgeon and patient. Use of these tools, however, can be time-consuming and logistically challenging. We investigated whether simply showing patients their images from preoperative computed tomography (CT) or angiography would improve patients' satisfaction with the preoperative discussion. We also examined whether this improved the patient's understanding and trust and whether it contributed to increased preoperative anxiety.MethodsPatients undergoing either elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair or lower limb revascularization were randomly assigned to either standard perioperative discussion or perioperative discussion and review of images (CT image or angiogram). Randomization was concealed and stratified by surgeon. Primary outcome was patient satisfaction with the preoperative discussion as measured by a validated 7-item scale (score, 0-28), with higher scores indicating improved satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included patient understanding, patient anxiety, patient trust, and length of preoperative discussion. Scores were compared using t-test.ResultsOverall, 51 patients were randomized, 25 to the intervention arm (discussion and imaging) and 26 to the control arm. Most patients were male (69%), and the average age was 70 years. Forty percent of patients underwent abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, whereas 60% underwent lower limb revascularization. Patient satisfaction with the discussion was generally high, with no added improvement when preoperative images were reviewed (mean score, 24.9 ± 3.02 vs 24.8 ± 2.93; P = .88). Similarly, there was no difference in the patient's anxiety, level of trust, or understanding when the imaging review was compared with standard discussion. There was a trend toward longer preoperative discussions in the group that underwent imaging review (8.18 vs 6.35 minutes; P = .07).ConclusionsShowing patients their CT or angiography images during the preoperative discussion does not improve the patient's satisfaction with the consent discussion. Similarly, there was no effect on the patient's trust, understanding, or anxiety level. Our conclusions are limited by the lack of a standardized measure of patient understanding and not measuring outcomes postoperatively, both of which should be considered in future studies.Copyright © 2018 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.