Informed consent: do information pamphlets improve post-operative risk-recall in patients undergoing total thyroidectomy: Prospective randomized control study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Informed consent consists of basic five elements: voluntarism, capacity, disclosure, understanding, and ultimate decision-making. Physician disclosure, patient understanding, and information retention are all essential in the doctor-patient relationship. This is inclusive of helping patients make and manage their decisions and expectations better and also to deal with any consequences and/or complications that arise. This study investigates whether giving patients procedure-specific handouts pre-operatively as part of the established informed consent process significantly improves overall risk-recall following surgery. These handouts outline the anticipated peri-operative risks and complications associated with total thyroidectomy, as well as the corrective measures to address complications. In addition, the influence of potential confounders affecting risk-recall, such as anxiety and pre-existing memory disturbance, are also examined. METHODS: Consecutive adult (≥18 years old) patients undergoing total thyroidectomy at a single academic tertiary care referral centre are included. Participants are randomly assigned into either the experimental group (with pamphlets) or the control group by a computerized randomization system (Clinstat). All participants filled out a Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and they are tested by the physician for short-term memory loss using the Memory Impairment Screen (MIS) exam. All patients are evaluated at one week post-operatively. The written recall questionnaire test is also administered during this clinical encounter. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients are included--25 of them receive verbal consent only, while another 24 patients received both verbal consent and patient education information pamphlets. The overall average of correct answers for each group was 83% and 80% in the control and intervention groups, respectively, with no statistically significant differences. There are also no statistically significant differences between the two groups, in both interview duration, in time between interviews, and in recall tests. No correlation is also apparent between the pre-op HADS score and the recall questionnaire overall score. CONCLUSIONS: A pre-operative thyroid surgical information pamphlet alone might not be sufficient to enhance patient test scores and optimally educate the patient on their expected care pathway in thyroid surgery. Supplementation with alternative means of patient education perhaps using emerging technologies needs to be further investigated.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,025 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».