Improving consent form documentation and introduction of procedure-specific labels in a district general hospital.

BMJ quality improvement reports Pub Date : 2017-02-08 eCollection Date: 2017-01-01 DOI:10.1136/bmjquality.u211571.w4730
Stefan Bajada, Samuel Dwamena, Zabihullah Abdul, Rhodri Williams, Owain Ennis
{"title":"Improving consent form documentation and introduction of procedure-specific labels in a district general hospital.","authors":"Stefan Bajada,&nbsp;Samuel Dwamena,&nbsp;Zabihullah Abdul,&nbsp;Rhodri Williams,&nbsp;Owain Ennis","doi":"10.1136/bmjquality.u211571.w4730","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Informed consent is an important aspect in patient care. Failings in this area may result in patient dissatisfaction or litigation. The aim of this project was to assess our practice in consenting and institute changes to maintain best practice. A consecutive series of 140 patients undergoing elective and trauma procedures were randomly identified over a nine-month period. The consent forms were reviewed and the following information collected: patient/ consenter details, procedure, legibility, if copy was offered/ given to patient and adequacy of procedure-specific complications listed (scored 0-3). The issues identified included: 25% of consents were not fully legible particularly in the complications section. 62% were noted to have inadequate complications listed (score 0 [>5 risks missing]) when compared to an accepted standard. None of the consent form copies were offered or given to the patients. Focused teaching to juniors as well as procedure-specific complication stickers were implemented to improve the documentation of complications. Following several improvement cycles all consents (100%) were fully legible and had the adequate procedure-specific labels with all complications listed. There was an increase to 38% of consent forms offered to patients. We have asked surgeons in the department to comment on which consent method they prefer and all consenters felt that the procedure-specific labels where easier to read and understand. Departmental education as well as introduction of simple procedure-specific complication stickers has resulted in significant improvements in practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":91218,"journal":{"name":"BMJ quality improvement reports","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/bmjquality.u211571.w4730","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ quality improvement reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjquality.u211571.w4730","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

Informed consent is an important aspect in patient care. Failings in this area may result in patient dissatisfaction or litigation. The aim of this project was to assess our practice in consenting and institute changes to maintain best practice. A consecutive series of 140 patients undergoing elective and trauma procedures were randomly identified over a nine-month period. The consent forms were reviewed and the following information collected: patient/ consenter details, procedure, legibility, if copy was offered/ given to patient and adequacy of procedure-specific complications listed (scored 0-3). The issues identified included: 25% of consents were not fully legible particularly in the complications section. 62% were noted to have inadequate complications listed (score 0 [>5 risks missing]) when compared to an accepted standard. None of the consent form copies were offered or given to the patients. Focused teaching to juniors as well as procedure-specific complication stickers were implemented to improve the documentation of complications. Following several improvement cycles all consents (100%) were fully legible and had the adequate procedure-specific labels with all complications listed. There was an increase to 38% of consent forms offered to patients. We have asked surgeons in the department to comment on which consent method they prefer and all consenters felt that the procedure-specific labels where easier to read and understand. Departmental education as well as introduction of simple procedure-specific complication stickers has resulted in significant improvements in practice.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

改进地区综合医院的同意书文件和采用特定程序的标签。
知情同意是病人护理的一个重要方面。在这方面的失败可能会导致患者不满或诉讼。这个项目的目的是评估我们的实践同意和研究所的变化,以保持最佳实践。在9个月的时间里,140名连续接受选择性和创伤手术的患者被随机确定。审查同意书并收集以下信息:患者/同意人的详细信息,程序,易读性,是否向患者提供/提供副本以及列出的程序特定并发症的充分性(评分为0-3)。确定的问题包括:25%的同意书不完全可读,特别是在并发症部分。与接受的标准相比,62%的患者被认为并发症不足(评分为0[>5风险缺失])。没有一份同意书副本提供给患者。对低年级学生进行重点教学,并实施特定手术并发症贴纸,以改善并发症的记录。经过几个改进周期,所有的同意书(100%)都是完全可读的,并有适当的程序特定标签,列出了所有并发症。提供给患者的同意书增加到38%。我们要求科室的外科医生评论他们更喜欢哪种同意方式,所有同意者都认为手术特定标签更容易阅读和理解。部门教育以及引入简单的程序特定并发症贴纸在实践中取得了显着改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信