Variations in consenting practice for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
BACKGROUND
To compare the variations in consenting practice amongst trainees and consultant surgeons for laparoscopic cholecystectomy with specific reference to the documentation of significant risks of surgery.


METHODS
A proforma was devised which included significant and/or commonly recognised complications of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This was then cross-referenced with the consent forms for the 80 patients included in the study and the documented risks explained in each case were noted.


RESULTS
The results showed that there is considerable variation between the three grades of clinicians involved in obtaining a patient's consent for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. There was a clear difference in emphasis of the significant complications depending on the seniority of the consenter. Over 80% of the consents in this study were still being obtained by junior staff.


CONCLUSIONS
More often than not, patients are not provided with consistent information to make an informed choice. We suggest that a preprinted consent form will provide a more uniform approach to consenting practice for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Chen
A M
AM
Department of Gastroenterology, North West London Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK. amchen@imperial.ac.uk
Leff
D R
DR
Simpson
J
J
Chadwick
S J D
SJ
McDonald
P J
PJ
D017081:Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; D032962:Consent Forms / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000592:standards; D003253:Consultants; D006801:Humans; D007258:Informed Consent / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000592:standards*; D007431:Intraoperative Complications; D008131:London; D008505:Medical Staff, Hospital / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000592:standards*; D010353:Patient Education as Topic / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000592:standards*; D010817:Physician-Patient Relations; D011364:Professional Practice / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000592:standards*; D012189:Retrospective Studies