695 Improving Consent Forms for Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy; a Visual Consent Form Toolkit. (19th August 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Jeilani, M; Super, J; Riad, M; Jayasankar, B
• Is Part Of: British journal of surgery. Volume 109(2022)Supplement 6
• Publication Date: 2022-08-19
• Subjects: Surgery -- Periodicals; 617.005
• DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znac269.357
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0007-1323

Abstract

Abstract: Aim: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a common elective operation with significant complication risks. GMC guidance on consent emphasises informed consent, and failure to warn patients of significant complications can lead to medico-legal implications. We aimed to assess the quality of risk documentation for laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed at our trust. In particular, we aimed to assess improvement since previous cycles after circulation of our boutique 'Visual Consent Form Toolkit', an easily accessible resource for risks associated with common procedures. Method: Consent forms for 49 elective laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed at a busy district general hospital between September and November 2021 were retrospectively analysed. Risk documentation was audited against a standard of 15 common complications associated with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Results: There was significant improvement across the board. Risks previously documented at 100% remained at this level (infection & bleeding). Those previously well-documented showed further improvement (CBD injury, bile leak, damage to local structures, open conversion & VTE). Of those not previously well-documented (the rest), all except two (diarrhoea & pancreatitis) showed improvement. In particular anaesthetic risks, which was emphasised in our toolkit, saw the largest improvement. Conclusions: Risk documentation on consent forms has overall considerably improved with the circulation of our 'Visual Consent Form Toolkit'. More risks now fully or partially meet the expected standard. From those risks not meeting the expected standard despite numerous audit cycles, we understand that surgeons do not feel these risks should be documented in all situations for all patients, and therefore that an expected standard does not necessarily apply for these risks.