Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Diseases of the Colon & Rectum 11/2004

01-11-2004 | Original Contributions

Informed Consent for Screening Sigmoidoscopy in a Veterans Administration Population

Authors: Marc D. Basson, M.D., Ph.D., Ruben Gomez, M.D., Ph.D., Lisa Fishman, M.D., Lisa Panzini, M.D.

Published in: Diseases of the Colon & Rectum | Issue 11/2004

Login to get access

PURPOSE

This study was performed to test the hypotheses that current consent methods may not convey the data that we imagine that they do, and that many patients may not want the data that we believe that we ought to provide. We also argue that excessive and unthinking emphasis on informed consent documentation may ignore real and important issues.

METHODS

Fifty-nine male patients consecutively scheduled for screening sigmoidoscopy were interviewed before and after the procedure in a tertiary care academic health center. Chi-squared analysis was used to determine if the three independent variables of ethnicity, educational level, and previous sigmoidoscopy experience were able to discriminate various components of the informed consent process.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine percent of patients could describe no indication other than doctor recommendation for the procedure. Although 86 percent of patients had heard of the word “polyp,” 16 percent could not define it. Fifteen percent of patients could not pick out from a list subsequent steps to be taken in case of an abnormal examination. Although most patients could describe discomforts associated with the procedure, only 19 percent of patients mentioned bleeding and perforation as possible complications. Only 5 percent of patients knew any alternatives to sigmoidoscopy. No patient could explain risks and benefits of alternatives. Eighty-eight percent of patients could not identify their endoscopist, but this only bothered 13 percent. Ninety-three percent of patients were given an opportunity to ask questions, but only 22 percent actually did so. All patients signed the consent form, but only 14 percent of patients actually read all of it. Most patients, 97 percent, thought that they had enough information to proceed with the endoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

By traditional and classic standards, the patients in this study did not give informed consent. Yet, surprisingly, despite this lack of informed consent, most of the patients failed to ask further questions of their physicians and claimed that they had sufficient information to proceed with the procedure. This was the case across the three independent variables of ethnicity, educational level, and previous sigmoidoscopy experience.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Schloendorff v Society of NY Hospital, 211 NY 125, l05 NE 92 (NY l914). Schloendorff v Society of NY Hospital, 211 NY 125, l05 NE 92 (NY l914).
2.
go back to reference Natanson v Kline, l86 Kan 393, 350 P2d l093; rehearing denied, l87 Kan l86, 354 P 2d 670 (Kan l960). Natanson v Kline, l86 Kan 393, 350 P2d l093; rehearing denied, l87 Kan l86, 354 P 2d 670 (Kan l960).
4.
go back to reference Plumeri, PA 1985Informed consent and the gastrointestinal endoscopistGastrointest Endosc321821 Plumeri, PA 1985Informed consent and the gastrointestinal endoscopistGastrointest Endosc321821
5.
go back to reference Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. The principle of respect for autonomy. In: Beauchamp TL, Childress JF (eds.), Principles of biomedical ethics. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, l989:67–119. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. The principle of respect for autonomy. In: Beauchamp TL, Childress JF (eds.), Principles of biomedical ethics. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, l989:67–119.
7.
go back to reference Ganzini L, Volicer L, Nelson W, et al. Ten myths about decision-making capacity. National Center for Ethics in Health Care Veterans Health Administration Department of Veterans Affairs 2002;1–11. Ganzini L, Volicer L, Nelson W, et al. Ten myths about decision-making capacity. National Center for Ethics in Health Care Veterans Health Administration Department of Veterans Affairs 2002;1–11.
8.
go back to reference Public Health Law (PHL) 2803 (1) (g) Patients’ Rights, 10NYCRR, 405.7, 405.7(a) (1), 405.7 (a)(2). Public Health Law (PHL) 2803 (1) (g) Patients’ Rights, 10NYCRR, 405.7, 405.7(a) (1), 405.7 (a)(2).
9.
go back to reference Meisel, A, Roth, LH, Lidz, CW 1977Toward a model of the legal doctrine of informed consentAm J Psychiatry1342859PubMed Meisel, A, Roth, LH, Lidz, CW 1977Toward a model of the legal doctrine of informed consentAm J Psychiatry1342859PubMed
10.
go back to reference Mazur, DJ 1986What should patients be told prior to a medical procedure?–ethical and legal perspectives on medical informed consent. Am J Med 8110514 Mazur, DJ 1986What should patients be told prior to a medical procedure?–ethical and legal perspectives on medical informed consent. Am J Med 8110514
11.
go back to reference Marshall, KG 1995Informed consent for tests for prostate cancerJAMA2741278 Marshall, KG 1995Informed consent for tests for prostate cancerJAMA2741278
12.
go back to reference Wolf, AM, Nasser, JF, Wolf, AM, Schorling, JB 1996The impact of informed consent on patient interest in prostate-specific antigen screeningArch Intern Med15613336CrossRefPubMed Wolf, AM, Nasser, JF, Wolf, AM, Schorling, JB 1996The impact of informed consent on patient interest in prostate-specific antigen screeningArch Intern Med15613336CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Colton C. Statistics in medicine. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1974:174. Colton C. Statistics in medicine. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1974:174.
14.
go back to reference Lavelle-Jones, C, Byrne, DJ, Rice, P, Cuschieri, A 1993Factors affecting quality of informed consentBMJ30688590PubMed Lavelle-Jones, C, Byrne, DJ, Rice, P, Cuschieri, A 1993Factors affecting quality of informed consentBMJ30688590PubMed
15.
go back to reference Pignone, M, Rich, M, Teutsch, S, et al. 2002Screening for colorectal cancer in adults at average risk: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task ForceAnn Intern Med13713241PubMed Pignone, M, Rich, M, Teutsch, S,  et al. 2002Screening for colorectal cancer in adults at average risk: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task ForceAnn Intern Med13713241PubMed
16.
17.
go back to reference Keomaka v. Zakaib, 811 P.2d.478 (Haw. Ct. App. 1991). Keomaka v. Zakaib, 811 P.2d.478 (Haw. Ct. App. 1991).
18.
go back to reference Sulmasy, DP, Lehmann, LS, Levine, DM, Raden, RR 1994Patients’ perceptions of the quality of informed consent for common medical proceduresJ Clin Ethics518994PubMed Sulmasy, DP, Lehmann, LS, Levine, DM, Raden, RR 1994Patients’ perceptions of the quality of informed consent for common medical proceduresJ Clin Ethics518994PubMed
19.
go back to reference Lipkus, IM, Rimer, BK, Lyna, PR, Pradhan, AA, Conaway, M, Woods-Powell, CT 1996Colorectal screening patterns and perceptions of risk among African-American users of a community health centerJ Community Health2140927PubMed Lipkus, IM, Rimer, BK, Lyna, PR, Pradhan, AA, Conaway, M, Woods-Powell, CT 1996Colorectal screening patterns and perceptions of risk among African-American users of a community health centerJ Community Health2140927PubMed
Metadata
Title
Informed Consent for Screening Sigmoidoscopy in a Veterans Administration Population
Authors
Marc D. Basson, M.D., Ph.D.
Ruben Gomez, M.D., Ph.D.
Lisa Fishman, M.D.
Lisa Panzini, M.D.
Publication date
01-11-2004
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum / Issue 11/2004
Print ISSN: 0012-3706
Electronic ISSN: 1530-0358
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-004-0705-x

Other articles of this Issue 11/2004

Diseases of the Colon & Rectum 11/2004 Go to the issue

Letters to the Editor

The Authors Reply