Consent, assent, and the importance of risk stratification

Relationship Between Newly Established Perioperative DNR Status and Perioperative Outcomes in the Elderly Population: A NSQIP Database Analysis

Background: Health care practitioners have developed complex algorithms to numerically calculate surgical risk. We examined the association between the initiation of a new do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status during hospitalization and postoperative outcomes, including mortality. We hypothesized that new DNR status would be associated with similar complication rates, even though mortality rates may be higher. Methods: A retrospective cohort study using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) Geriatric Surgery Research File. Two cohorts were defined by the presence of a new DNR status during the hospitalization that was not present on hospital admission. Multivariable logistic regression was used to control for differences between the DNR and non-DNR cohorts. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included rates of postoperative complications, including returning to the operating room, reintubation, failure to wean from ventilation, surgical site infections, dehiscence, pneumonia, acute kidney injury, renal failure, stroke, cardiac arrest, acute myocardial infarction, transfusion requirements, sepsis, urinary tract infections, venous thromboembolisms, total number of complications for each patient, and hospital length of stay. Results: In our geriatric population with a newly established DNR status, the mortality rate was 39.29%, significantly greater than the non-DNR population after multivariable regression. Secondary outcomes also occurred at an increased rate in the DNR cohort including surgical site infections (8.29% vs 4.04%), pneumonia (18% vs 2.26%), renal insufficiency (2.43% vs 0.35%), acute renal failure (5% vs 0.19%), stroke (3% vs 0.36%), acute myocardial infarction (6.29% vs 0.95%), and cardiac arrest (5.86% vs 0.51%). Conclusions: The initiation of a new DNR status during hospitalization is associated with a significantly higher burden of both morbidity and mortality. This contrasts with prior studies that did not show an increased rate of adverse outcomes and suggests that a new DNR status in postoperative patients may reflect a consequence of adverse postoperative events. The informed consent process in older patients at risk for adverse outcomes after surgery should include discussions regarding goals of care and acceptable risk.

Adequacy of measures of informed consent in medical practice: A systematic review

As a critical component of medical practice, it is alarming that patient informed consent does not always reflect (1) adequate information provision, (2) comprehension of provided information, and (3) a voluntary decision. Consequences of poor informed consent include low patient satisfaction, compromised treatment adherence, and litigation against medical practitioners. To ensure a well-informed, well-comprehended, and voluntary consent process, the objective and replicable measurement of these domains via psychometrically sound self-report measures is critical. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the adequacy of existing measures in terms of the extent to which they assess the three domains of informed consent, are psychometrically sound and acceptable for use by patients. Extensive searching of multiple databases (PsychINFO, PubMed, Sociological Abstracts, CINAHL, AMED) yielded 10,000 potential studies, with 16 relevant scales identified. No existing scale was found to measure all three consent domains, with most only narrowly assessing aspects of any one domain. Information provision was the most frequently assessed domain, followed by comprehension, and then voluntariness. None of the identified scales were found to have adequate evidence for either high quality psychometric properties or patient user acceptability. No existing scale is fit for purpose in comprehensively assessing all domains of informed consent. In the absence of any existing measure meeting the necessary criteria relating to information, comprehension and voluntariness, there is an urgent need for a new measure of medical consent to be developed that is psychometrically sound, spans all three domains and is acceptable to patients and clinicians alike. These findings provide the impetus and justification for the redesign of the informed consent process, with the aim to provide a robust, reliable and replicable process that will in turn improve the quality of the patient experience and care provided.

American Society of Anesthesiologists Class as Predictor for Perioperative Morbidity in Head and Neck Free Flaps

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate outcomes of free flaps in low- versus high-risk American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classes utilizing a standardized perioperative clinical pathway.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series with chart review.

SETTING

Single tertiary care academic institution.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Data were collected from 301 patients who underwent 305 free flap reconstructions for head and neck defects from January 2012 to March 2016 by a single surgeon (M.M.). A standardized perioperative clinical pathway was utilized for all patients, aimed at abbreviating hospital stay and minimizing intensive care unit stay. Data included ASA classification, comorbidities, length of hospitalization, intensive care unit stay, 30-day mortality/readmission, discharge disposition, flap survival, and postoperative complications. Low-risk ASA classes were defined as 1 and 2 (n = 53) and high risk as 3 and 4 (n = 248).

RESULTS

Total medical complication rates (P = .012) were mildly increased in the high-risk group, as a result of increased minor-not major-medical complication rates (P = .007). Discharge to a nursing or rehabilitation facility was found to be more common in the high-risk group (P = .024). All other outcomes were not statistically different between the cohorts.

CONCLUSION

The ASA classification system is a validated tool in determining perioperative risk. We found that minor medical complications and discharge to a rehabilitation/nursing facility were increased in the high-risk ASA classes; otherwise, there were no statistical differences between the groups. These findings suggest that the ASA classification may be helpful for preoperative discharge planning and counseling but should not be used for patient selection or to assess candidacy for the procedure.

Evaluation of anesthesia informed consent in pediatric practice - An observation cohort study

Background and Aims

An informed consent requires active participation by both physicians and patients. It is the responsibility of the physician to give the complete disclosure of information in easy language for the parent to understand. An informed consent process can be a challenge especially for the anesthetists when time is a limiting factor for patient-anesthetist interaction especially in same day admission and day surgery. The aim of this study was to subjectively evaluate the understanding and recall of the informed consent by the parents.

Material and Methods

The validated survey was conducted over 10 weeks and was limited to one parent per child and to the parent who was directly involved in the consent process.

Results

Majority of parents rated positively for adequate disclosure of all items of information. Consent process done on day of surgery was found to be associated with lower parental rating in adequacy of disclosure of pain relief options. Seniority of anesthetists was associated with higher parental rating of adequacy of information regarding post operative plan, specific risk of child and overall consent process. Consent for minor surgeries, on day of surgery, did not significantly affect the parental performance in their recall of disclosed information but was associated with significant lower rating of adequacy of postoperative plan. Postoperative pain is among the areas for improvement especially in day surgery cases.

Conclusion

Consent taken on day of surgery was found to be associated with lower parental rating. Postoperative plan for pain required improvement especially in day surgery cases.

Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes in Elderly Patients With a Do-Not-Resuscitate Order Undergoing Elective and Nonelective Hip Surgery

PURPOSE

Emergency hip surgery generally has worse outcomes than elective hip surgery, even when adjusted for patient and surgical factors. Do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status patients are typically at higher perioperative risk and undergo a narrow range of surgical procedures. We aimed to compare the outcomes after hip surgery of differing degrees of urgency in this cohort.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) data, we conducted univariate and multivariate analyses comparing outcomes of DNR status patients after emergency and nonemergency hip surgery (2007-2013). We conducted a subanalysis of mortality in elective versus nonelective cases (elective variable introduced from 2011).

RESULTS

Of 668 hip surgery cases in DNR status patients, 210 (31.4%) were emergency and 458 (68.8%) were nonemergency. There were no significant associations between emergency and nonemergency surgery regarding patient demographics, comorbidities, functional capacity, anesthesia type, or operative duration. There was no significant difference in the 30-day postoperative mortality between emergency (21.4%) and nonemergency (16.4%) or between elective (19.6%) and nonelective (18.3%) hip fracture surgeries performed in patients with preexisting DNR status. Morbidity patterns in emergency vs nonemergency cases demonstrated no significant differences, with the commonest 3 complications being transfusion (21.0% and 21.4%, respectively), urinary tract infection (9.5% and 7.9%, respectively), and pneumonia (both at 5.2%). The 30-day home discharge rates were low at 4.7% and 5.6%, respectively. Multivariate analysis demonstrated no significant associations between emergency and nonemergency surgery for mortality, discharge destination, length of stay or complications, except perioperative myocardial infarction (3.7% vs 1.3%, P < .04).

CONCLUSION

For patients with DNR status, both emergent and non-emergent hip surgery carries high mortality, greatly exceeding rates predicted for that patient by American College of Surgeons NSQIP risk calculators. Morbidity rates and patterns for patients with DNR status are also similar in emergency and nonemergency groups. These data may be useful in discussing risk and obtaining adequately informed consent in DNR patients undergoing hip surgery.

Presenting risk information in sexual and reproductive health care

OBJECTIVES

Presenting risk information to patients is an important part of clinical encounters. Good risk communication improves patient satisfaction with their care and the decisions they make. In sexual and reproductive healthcare (SRH), women frequently need to make decisions based on their perceived risk. Risk perception can be altered by how actual risk is presented to patients.

METHODS

Databases were searched using MeSH terms combined with a keyword search for articles relevant to SRH; the search was limited to English language.

RESULTS

Personalised risk communication where a risk score is provided, increases knowledge and slightly increases uptake of screening tests. Decision aids improve a patient's knowledge of the options, create realistic expectations of their benefits and harms, reduce difficulty with decision-making, and increase participation in the process. The most effective way to present risks uses a range of structured, tailored presentation styles; interactive formats are best. Framing the information improves patient understanding. Most people understand natural frequencies or event rates better than probability formats with varying denominators. Expressing changes in risk as an absolute risk reduction or relative risk reduction with baseline risk formats improves understanding. Descriptive terms such as 'low risk' or 'high risk' should be quantified as a frequency rather than a percentage. Using a consistent denominator to portray risk is recommended. Using the 'number needed to treat' and visual aids puts benefits or risks into perspective. The duration of risk should be presented.

CONCLUSION

Presenting risk information to patients can be optimised using a number of strategies.

A single consent for serial anesthetics in burn surgery

Obtaining anesthesia informed consent for a series of repetitive debridements in burn-injured patients requires a significant time investment for anesthesiologists and patient families. A single consent form was introduced that covered multiple related anesthetics in burn patients. The number of consents per patient before and after implementation was analyzed using Welch ANOVA; Tukey-Kramer post hoc test, with 99% confidence intervals for mean differences was used to examine pairwise comparisons. The mean number of consents per patient was 4.5 ± 2.8 and 1.6 ± 0.51 (P < 0.001) before (2010) and after implementation (2013), respectively. The Multiple Related Anesthetics Consent Form in this population resulted in less time spent by anesthesia providers in obtaining consent for patients undergoing multiple related procedures while providing patient- and family-centric care.

Informed consent for anesthesia: a review of practice and strategies for optimizing the consent process

PURPOSE

Patients must receive information in a manner that promotes understanding so they can make informed decisions about anesthesia and other medical interventions. Unfortunately, history is replete with examples of the negative consequences of inadequate disclosure of information and lack of patient understanding. While obtaining consent for anesthesia poses unique challenges, the ability of the anesthesiologist to engage the patient in meaningful discussion is critical as a means to ensure that the patient is truly informed. This narrative review aims to: 1) discuss the process of informed consent as it applies to anesthesia practice; 2) describe the salient issues related to patient capacity, disclosure, understanding, decision-making, and documentation of the informed consent process; and 3) discuss current strategies to improve the presentation and understanding of consent information.

SOURCE

Review of the extant literature, including the authors' own research.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Despite the ethical imperative of informed consent, many decision-makers have limited understanding of medical information. The reasons for this are multifactorial but often result from incomplete disclosure and presentation of generic information that does not take into account differences in information needs, values, and preferences of individual patients. Several simple strategies are available, however, that can enhance decision-makers' understanding of both written and verbal information.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the unique challenges of obtaining consent for anesthesia on the day of surgery, attention to the manner in which information for anesthesia care is provided and adoption of simple strategies to enhance understanding can go a long way to ensure that decision-makers are appropriately informed.

Characteristic interviews, different strategies: Methodological challenges in qualitative interviewing among respondents with mild intellectual disabilities

Conducting qualitative research interviews among individuals with intellectual disabilities, including cognitive limitations and difficulties in communication, presents particular research challenges. One question is whether the difficulties that informants encounter affect interviews to such an extent that the validity of the results is weakened. This article focuses on voluntary informed consent and the specific challenges with the greatest effects on such interviews. The discussion shows that complementary and meaningful descriptions from informants imply the need to employ alternative strategies and methods that may, in other contexts, challenge the traditional understanding of what is acceptable in research.

Quality and outcomes in anaesthesia: lessons from litigation

Healthcare litigation in the UK continues to grow at an alarming rate, with claims against anaesthetists and critical care physicians increasing each year. This has led to a huge financial burden for the taxpayer and a sharp increase in professional indemnity fees for individual doctors. Although such litigation should provide valuable information to educate practitioners and reduce future similar claims, there appear to be significant barriers preventing important lessons from being learned. Detailed learning opportunities are available only to the healthcare providers being sued or the expert witnesses employed to analyse the claims. Most practitioners have to rely on indemnifiers' case reports, closed-claim analyses, and ad hoc publications for information. In this review, we suggest ways in which important lessons from litigation could be brought to the attention of all clinicians. Currently, most clinicians are unable to determine whether key components of their practice such as consent, clinical decision-making, and documentation are of an acceptable standard for legal scrutiny. By reporting outcomes of Coroners' inquests, clinical and criminal negligence cases, and referrals to the General Medical Council, it would be hoped that more explicit standards of performance could be derived. Ultimately, this may not only improve patient safety, but protect practitioners from unjustifiable claims. Finally, given the critical importance of experts in the above process, we believe that a system for professional registration and regulation should be explored to ensure that they offer accurate, representative, and unbiased opinions and have the appropriate expertise in the subject matter to be analysed.