Patient perceptions and recall of consent for regional anaesthesia compared with consent for surgery

Roxaneh Zarnegar; Matthew R D Brown; Matthew Henley; Victoria Tidman; Ahilan Pathmanathan

doi:10.1177/0141076815604494

Patient perceptions and recall of consent for regional anaesthesia compared with consent for surgery

J R Soc Med. 2015 Nov;108(11):451-6. doi: 10.1177/0141076815604494. Epub 2015 Oct 2.

Authors

Roxaneh Zarnegar¹, Matthew R D Brown², Matthew Henley³, Victoria Tidman⁴, Ahilan Pathmanathan⁵

Affiliations

¹ Department of Anaesthesia, Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Brockley Hill, Stanmore, Middlesex HA7 4LP, UK roxaneh.zarnegar@rnoh.nhs.uk.
² Pain Research Fellow, The Royal Marsden Hospital/The Institute of Cancer Research, London SW3 6JJ, UK.
³ Department of Anaesthesia, Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Brockley Hill, Stanmore, Middlesex HA7 4LP, UK.
⁴ Specialty Registrar, Barts and the London School of Anaesthesia, London E1 1BB, UK.
⁵ Consultant, East & North Hertfordshire NHS Trust, Stevenage SG1 4AB, UK.

Abstract

Objective: In Britain, consent for surgery is documented using a Department of Health form signed by the surgeon and the patient. In contrast, anaesthetic procedures have no formalised consent process. Evidence on the process of consent for regional anaesthesia, and patient perceptions of this, is scarce outside obstetric practice. We aimed to determine patient recall and perceptions of consent for interscalene brachial plexus block and compared this to surgical consent for shoulder arthroplasty.

Design: Prospective observational survey.

Setting: A specialist musculoskeletal centre, UK.

Participants: Forty-six patients (female:male 30:16, mean age 61 years) undergoing shoulder arthroplasty with interscalene brachial plexus block.

Main outcome measures: Recall and understanding of consent for regional anaesthesia and surgery was examined using a semi-structured questionnaire 1-2 days after arthroplasty. Surgical consent forms and discussions recorded by the anaesthetist were examined in participants' medical notes to compare against the level of recall. Analysis to determine statistical significance was conducted using McNemar's test.

Results: Recall of surgical risks was overall significantly better than recall of brachial plexus block risks. Compared to their recollections of surgical risk, patients remembered fewer specific risks for brachial plexus block (p < 0.001). There were more patients unable to recall any risks when questioned about brachial plexus block than about their surgery (p < 0.05). One-third of patients did not regard the consent discussion about regional anaesthesia as important as consent for surgery and over one-quarter had not recognised the preoperative discussion about the brachial plexus block as a consent process similar to that conducted for surgery.

Conclusions: Fundamental misunderstandings about the consent process are prevalent. Future work in this area should seek to investigate how documentation of the consent process and patients' understanding of consent for regional anaesthesia can be improved.

Keywords: consent; intercalene brachial plexus block; regional anaesthesia.

Publication types

Comparative Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Anesthesia, Conduction*
Brachial Plexus Block*
Comprehension*
Female
Humans
Informed Consent*
Male
Mental Recall*
Middle Aged
Patient Acceptance of Health Care*
Prospective Studies
Risk
Shoulder / innervation
Shoulder / surgery*
Surveys and Questionnaires
United Kingdom