Another look at the informed consent process: The document and the conversation

Multicomponent Informed Consent with Marshallese Participants

Pacific Islanders are the second fastest-growing population in the United States; however, Pacific Islanders, and Marshallese specifically, are underrepresented in health research. A community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach was used to engage Marshallese stakeholders and build an academic-community research collaborative to conduct health disparities research. Our CBPR partnership pilot tested a multicomponent consent process that provides participants the option to control the use of their data. Consent forms used concise plain language to describe study information, including participant requirements, risks, and personal health information protections, and were available in both English and Marshallese. This study demonstrates that when provided a multicomponent consent, the vast majority of consenting study participants (89.6%) agreed to all additional options, and only five (10.4%) provided consent for some but not all options. Our description of the development and implementation of a multicomponent consent using a CBPR approach adds a specific example of community engagement and may be informative for other indigenous populations.

Role of the consent form in UK veterinary practice

Background

Informed consent from the client is required before veterinary professionals may administer treatment or perform surgery on an animal patient, except in an emergency. This study investigates the potential role(s) of the consent form in the consent process in the UK.

Methods

Thematic analysis was carried out on the text contained in 39 blank consent forms sourced from veterinary practices in the UK. Analysis was conducted at the levels of topical survey and thematic summary.

Results

Consent forms were used to authorise procedures, to define proposed treatment, to offer or recommend additional procedures, to convey the risks of treatment and to document the client’s financial obligations. None of the forms analysed provided sufficient space to document the accompanying conversation. Notable omissions from the submitted forms included options for treatment and benefits of treatment.

Conclusions

The consent form acts as a record of the procedure to be performed, the associated costs and the status of the person giving consent. However, from this analysis, it often fails to record the detail of the consent discussion, an essential part of the consent process. A proposal for an improved version of a veterinary consent form is provided.