'Will you be doing my operation doctor?' Patient attitudes to informed consent.

BACKGROUND

As part of the consent process, it is part of a doctor's duty of care to reveal any material risk. Depending upon the level of supervision, whether the operating surgeon is a trainee may be such a risk, but in our experience this is not routinely discussed with patients pre-operatively. We set out to discover patients' attitudes to being operated on by trainee urological surgeons.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 101 completed questionnaires were received from patients (90 male, 11 female, mean age 72 years) undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), transurethral resection of a bladder tumour (TURBT) or cystodiathermy on various aspects of their attitudes to being operated on by junior doctors as part of training.

RESULTS

The response rate was 77%. Of the respondents, 94 patients (91%) thought that junior doctors should perform surgery as part of their training. Only 11 of 73 (15%) said they would be happy for a junior doctor, competent to perform the procedure, to operate unsupervised. Of 98 patients, 80 (82%) thought they should be told if the operation was going to be performed by a junior doctor, and 85 (87%) that they should be told their name and designation.

CONCLUSIONS

For consent to be 'informed', the experience and identity of the surgeon should be made known to patients. Most patients are happy to be operated on by a junior doctor under consultant supervision, but would want to be told and know their name and status.