BMJ, doi: 10.1136/bmj.38922.516204.55, (Published 31 July 2006)

RESEARCH

Patients' perceptions of written consent: questionnaire study

Andrea Akkad ¹, Clare Jackson ², Sara Kenyon ², Mary Dixon-Woods ², Nick Taub ², Marwan Habiba ^1*

¹ Reproductive Science Section, Department of Cancer Studies and Molecular Medicine, University of Leicester, Leicester LE2 7LX
² Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 6TP

^* Correspondence to: mah6{at}le.ac.uk.

Objective To examine patients' understanding of the status, function, and remit of written consent to surgery.

Design Prospective questionnaire study. Questionnaires were sent to patients within one month of surgery. Responses were analysed with frequencies and single variable analyses.

Setting Large teaching hospital.

Participants 732 patients who had undergone surgery in obstetrics and gynaecology over a six month period.

Main outcome measures Patients' awareness of the legal implications of written consent and their views on the function and remit of the consent form.

Results Patients had limited understanding of the legal standing of written consent. Nearly half (46%, 95% confidence interval 43% to 50%) of patients believed the primary function of consent forms was to protect hospitals and 68% (65% to 71%) thought consent forms allowed doctors to assume control. Only 41% (37% to 44%) of patients believed consent forms made their wishes known.

Conclusions Many patients seem to have limited awareness of the legal implications of signing or not signing consent forms, and they do not recognise written consent as primarily serving their interests. Current consent procedures seem inadequate as a means for the expression of autonomous choice, and their ethical standing and credibility can be called into question.

---

(Accepted 14 July 2006)
CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

Patients misunderstand purpose of consent
BMJ 2006 333: 0. [Full Text]

Whither medicine?

Fiona Godlee
BMJ 2006 333: 0. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Hey, E. (2009). Managing allegations of research misconduct. JRSM 102: 134-138 [Full text]  
• Barnett, A T, Crandon, I, Lindo, J F, Gordon-Strachan, G, Robinson, D, Ranglin, D (2008). An assessment of the process of informed consent at the University Hospital of the West Indies. J. Med. Ethics 34: 344-347 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• (2007). Relevant research from non-orthodontic journals. J. Orthod. 34: 46-49 [Abstract] [Full text]  

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Procedure-specific consent: the informed approach

Umar S Shariff, et al.
bmj.com, 5 Sep 2006 [Full text]

Patients' perceptions of written consent: questionnaire study

Tony S Zigmond
bmj.com, 10 Sep 2006 [Full text]

Informed consent information

Jeevan P Marasinghe
bmj.com, 12 Sep 2006 [Full text]

Patient Perceptions of Consent Forms

Sarah Chaudhary
bmj.com, 12 Sep 2006 [Full text]

One way forward: Review and update DOH’s Consent Key Documents.

Babatunde A. Gbolade
bmj.com, 12 Sep 2006 [Full text]

"Informed " or "basic" consent: Are doctors seeking the latter one?

Tatiana Izotova, et al.
bmj.com, 13 Sep 2006 [Full text]

Health literacy is an often ignored underlying issue

Andrew F. Pleasant
bmj.com, 14 Sep 2006 [Full text]

Is written "informed consent" simply a judicial act?

Giuseppe Vetrugno, et al.
bmj.com, 15 Sep 2006 [Full text]

Re: Is written "informed consent" simply a judicial act?

Nazar R DESSOUKI
bmj.com, 16 Sep 2006 [Full text]

Informed consent

Fiona Woollard
bmj.com, 21 Sep 2006 [Full text]

impact of patient’s written consent on the understanding of their diagnosis

Frédéric Lapostolle, et al.
bmj.com, 21 Sep 2006 [Full text]

Online poll

Find out more >>