Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 5/2024

18-03-2024 | Cholecystectomy

Optimizing the consent process for emergent laparoscopic cholecystectomy using an interactive digital education platform: a randomized control trial

Authors: Anood Alqaydi, Erin Williams, Sulaiman Nanji, Boris Zevin

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 5/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Informed consent is essential for any surgery. The use of digital education platforms (DEPs) can enhance patient understanding of the consent discussion and is a method to standardize the consent process in elective, ambulatory settings. The use of DEP as an adjunct to standard verbal consent (SVC) has not been studied in an acute care setting.

Methods

We conducted a prospective randomized control trial with patients presenting to the emergency department of a tertiary care hospital with acute biliary pathology requiring a laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) between August 2021 and April 2023. Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive either a DEP module with SVC or SVC alone. Baseline procedure-specific knowledge and self-reported understanding of risks and benefits of LC were collected using a questionnaire. Primary outcome was immediate post-intervention knowledge assessed using a 21-question multiple choice questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were delayed procedure-specific knowledge and participants’ satisfaction with the consent discussion.

Results

We recruited 79 participants and randomized them 1:1 into the intervention group (DEP + SVC, n = 40) and the control group (SVC, n = 39). Baseline demographics and baseline procedure-specific knowledge were similar between groups. The immediate post-intervention knowledge was significantly higher for participants in the intervention versus the control group with a Cohen’s d effect size of 0.68 (85.2(10.6)% vs. 78.2(9.9)%; p = 0.004). Similarly, self-reported understanding of risks and benefits of LC was significantly greater for participants in the intervention versus the control group with a Cohen’s effect size of 0.76 (68.5(16.4)% vs. 55.1(18.8)%; p = 0.001). For participants who completed the delayed post-intervention assessment (n = 29), there continued to be significantly higher retention of acquired knowledge in the intervention group with a Cohen’s effect size of 0.61 (86.5(8.5)% vs. 79.8 (13.1)%; p = 0.024). There was no difference in participants’ self-reported satisfaction with the consent discussion between groups (69.5(6.7)% vs. 67.2(7.7)%; p = 0.149).

Conclusion

The addition of digital education platform to standard verbal consent significantly improves patient’s early and delayed understanding of risks and benefits of LC in an acute care setting.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Canadian Medical Protective Agency (2019) Shining a light on the medical-legal risks of laparoscopic surgery. CMPA Perspective, p 15–18 Canadian Medical Protective Agency (2019) Shining a light on the medical-legal risks of laparoscopic surgery. CMPA Perspective, p 15–18
3.
go back to reference Leclercq WK, Keulers BJ, Houterman S et al (2013) A survey of the current practice of the informed consent process in general surgery in the Netherlands. Patient Saf Surg 7(1):4CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Leclercq WK, Keulers BJ, Houterman S et al (2013) A survey of the current practice of the informed consent process in general surgery in the Netherlands. Patient Saf Surg 7(1):4CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Giudici-Wach K, Gillois P, Remen T et al (2022) Learning from informed consent litigation to improve practices: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns 105(7):1714–1721CrossRefPubMed Giudici-Wach K, Gillois P, Remen T et al (2022) Learning from informed consent litigation to improve practices: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns 105(7):1714–1721CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Zevin B, Almakky M, Mancini U et al (2022) Digital approach to informed consent in bariatric surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 36(1):809–816CrossRefPubMed Zevin B, Almakky M, Mancini U et al (2022) Digital approach to informed consent in bariatric surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 36(1):809–816CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Larsen DLAC, Hargreaves WA, Nguyen TD (1979) Assessment of client and patient satisfaction: development of a general scale. Eval Program Plans 2:197–207CrossRef Larsen DLAC, Hargreaves WA, Nguyen TD (1979) Assessment of client and patient satisfaction: development of a general scale. Eval Program Plans 2:197–207CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Connor MJ, Hazelton D, Dela Cruz NJM et al (2023) Improving informed consent in elective urological surgery using a digital consent platform. BJU Int 132:502CrossRefPubMed Connor MJ, Hazelton D, Dela Cruz NJM et al (2023) Improving informed consent in elective urological surgery using a digital consent platform. BJU Int 132:502CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Lunt H, Connor S, Skinner H et al (2019) Electronic informed consent: the need to redesign the consent process for the digital age. Intern Med J 49(7):923–929CrossRefPubMed Lunt H, Connor S, Skinner H et al (2019) Electronic informed consent: the need to redesign the consent process for the digital age. Intern Med J 49(7):923–929CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Abujarad F, Peduzzi P, Mun S et al (2021) Comparing a multimedia digital informed consent tool with traditional paper-based methods: randomized controlled trial. JMIR Formative Res 5(10):e20458CrossRef Abujarad F, Peduzzi P, Mun S et al (2021) Comparing a multimedia digital informed consent tool with traditional paper-based methods: randomized controlled trial. JMIR Formative Res 5(10):e20458CrossRef
11.
go back to reference St John ER, Ezzat A, Holford N et al (2022) Digital consent to improve patient perception of shared decision-making: comparative study between paper and digital consent processes in patients undergoing breast surgery. Br J Surg 109(11):1172–1173CrossRefPubMed St John ER, Ezzat A, Holford N et al (2022) Digital consent to improve patient perception of shared decision-making: comparative study between paper and digital consent processes in patients undergoing breast surgery. Br J Surg 109(11):1172–1173CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Fraser-Govil S, Elmowafy A, Pardoe H (2023) Greater patient than staff satisfaction scores for electronic consent. Curēus (Palo Alto, CA). 15(7):e41810 Fraser-Govil S, Elmowafy A, Pardoe H (2023) Greater patient than staff satisfaction scores for electronic consent. Curēus (Palo Alto, CA). 15(7):e41810
13.
go back to reference Doty MS, Chen HY, Grace R et al (2022) Stress, anxiety and depression levels in pregnancy: outpatient versus inpatient. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 35(25):9608–9613CrossRefPubMed Doty MS, Chen HY, Grace R et al (2022) Stress, anxiety and depression levels in pregnancy: outpatient versus inpatient. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 35(25):9608–9613CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Glaser J, Nouri S, Fernandez A et al (2020) Interventions to improve patient comprehension in informed consent for medical and surgical procedures: an updated systematic review. Med Decis Making 40(2):119–143CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Glaser J, Nouri S, Fernandez A et al (2020) Interventions to improve patient comprehension in informed consent for medical and surgical procedures: an updated systematic review. Med Decis Making 40(2):119–143CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
go back to reference Singer KE, Baker JE, Elson NC et al (2022) How informed is your informed consent: evaluating differences between resident and attending obtained consents for cholecystectomy. J Surg Educ 79(6):1509–1515CrossRefPubMed Singer KE, Baker JE, Elson NC et al (2022) How informed is your informed consent: evaluating differences between resident and attending obtained consents for cholecystectomy. J Surg Educ 79(6):1509–1515CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Burger BB, Veerman MM, Tellier MA et al (2019) Insight in information provision prior to obtaining surgical informed consent—by audiotaping outpatient consultations. World J Surg 43(2):425–430CrossRefPubMed Burger BB, Veerman MM, Tellier MA et al (2019) Insight in information provision prior to obtaining surgical informed consent—by audiotaping outpatient consultations. World J Surg 43(2):425–430CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Dyke R, St-John E, Shah H et al (2023) Comparing shared decision making using a paper and digital consent process. A multi-site, single centre study in a trauma and orthopaedic department. Surgeon 21(4):235–241CrossRefPubMed Dyke R, St-John E, Shah H et al (2023) Comparing shared decision making using a paper and digital consent process. A multi-site, single centre study in a trauma and orthopaedic department. Surgeon 21(4):235–241CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Parsons SL, Daliya P, Evans P et al (2023) Digital informed consent: modernising information sharing in surgery to empower patients. World J Surg 47(3):649–657CrossRefPubMed Parsons SL, Daliya P, Evans P et al (2023) Digital informed consent: modernising information sharing in surgery to empower patients. World J Surg 47(3):649–657CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Optimizing the consent process for emergent laparoscopic cholecystectomy using an interactive digital education platform: a randomized control trial
Authors
Anood Alqaydi
Erin Williams
Sulaiman Nanji
Boris Zevin
Publication date
18-03-2024
Publisher
Springer US
Keyword
Cholecystectomy
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 5/2024
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-10775-1

Other articles of this Issue 5/2024

Surgical Endoscopy 5/2024 Go to the issue