Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco (YS, AF, RS, DS)
Department of Epidemiology, University of California, San Francisco (YS)
Med Decis Making. 2011 Jan-Feb;31(1):151-73. doi: 10.1177/0272989X10364247. Epub 2010 Mar 31.
Patient understanding in clinical informed consent is often poor. Little is known about the effectiveness of interventions to improve comprehension or the extent to which such interventions address different elements of understanding in informed consent.
. To systematically review communication interventions to improve patient comprehension in informed consent for medical and surgical procedures. Data Sources. A systematic literature search of English-language articles in MEDLINE (1949-2008) and EMBASE (1974-2008) was performed. In addition, a published bibliography of empirical research on informed consent and the reference lists of all eligible studies were reviewed. Study Selection. Randomized controlled trials and controlled trials with nonrandom allocation were included if they compared comprehension in informed consent for a medical or surgical procedure. Only studies that used a quantitative, objective measure of understanding were included. All studies addressed informed consent for a needed or recommended procedure in actual patients. Data Extraction. Reviewers independently extracted data using a standardized form. All results were compared, and disagreements were resolved by consensus. Data Synthesis. Forty-four studies were eligible. Intervention categories included written information, audiovisual/multimedia, extended discussions, and test/feedback techniques. The majority of studies assessed patient understanding of procedural risks; other elements included benefits, alternatives, and general knowledge about the procedure. Only 6 of 44 studies assessed all 4 elements of understanding. Interventions were generally effective in improving patient comprehension, especially regarding risks and general knowledge. Limitations. Many studies failed to include adequate description of the study population, and outcome measures varied widely.
. A wide range of communication interventions improve comprehension in clinical informed consent. Decisions to enhance informed consent should consider the importance of different elements of understanding, beyond procedural risks, as well as feasibility and acceptability of the intervention to clinicians and patients. Conceptual clarity regarding the key elements of informed consent knowledge will help to focus improvements and standardize evaluations.
患者在临床知情同意中的理解常常较差。对于改善理解的干预措施的效果,以及这些干预措施在多大程度上解决了知情同意中的不同理解要素,我们知之甚少。
系统评价改善医疗和外科程序知情同意中患者理解的沟通干预措施。
对 MEDLINE(1949-2008 年)和 EMBASE(1974-2008 年)的英文文献进行了系统检索。此外,还查阅了知情同意的实证研究的已发表书目和所有合格研究的参考文献列表。
如果随机对照试验和非随机分配的对照试验比较了医疗或外科程序的知情同意中的理解情况,则将其纳入。只有使用定量、客观的理解测量方法的研究才被纳入。所有研究均涉及对实际患者的必需或推荐程序的知情同意。
审查员使用标准化表格独立提取数据。所有结果均进行比较,如有分歧则通过协商解决。
44 项研究符合纳入标准。干预类别包括书面信息、视听/多媒体、扩展讨论和测试/反馈技术。大多数研究评估了患者对程序风险的理解;其他要素包括获益、替代方案以及对程序的一般了解。仅有 44 项研究中的 6 项评估了理解的所有 4 个要素。干预措施通常能有效提高患者的理解,尤其是关于风险和一般知识的理解。
许多研究未能充分描述研究人群,并且结果测量方法差异很大。
各种沟通干预措施可改善临床知情同意中的理解。增强知情同意的决策应考虑到理解的不同要素的重要性,超出程序风险,还应考虑干预措施对临床医生和患者的可行性和可接受性。对知情同意关键要素的概念理解将有助于集中改进并标准化评估。