Abstract
Introduction: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the most common revascularization procedure performed for coronary artery disease. All medical procedures carry a risk and therefore patients are required to give informed consent (IC). This process is a part of good clinical practice, is a universal right, and reflects ethical principles. There are several stages to the IC process making it complex, yet little is known of the patient experience of IC for PCI.
Purpose: To evaluate patient understanding of the IC process and PCI outcomes.
Methods: A prospective cross-sectional survey was administered to a convenience sample treated with elective or urgent PCI at a single center in USA. Subjects completed the 36-item questionnaire to assess their understanding of the IC process, the risks benefits and potential outcomes of PCI. Items were rated on a scale of 1 completely agree to 5 completely disagree.
Results: Eighty-two subjects, mean age of 65 years, 64 (78%) males, 59 (72%) college-educated, completed the questionnaire after PCI. Forty-nine subjects (60%) were urgent cases. Forty seven percent received written information pre-PCI. Most (82%) recognized the key components of IC (choice, risk/benefit, alternatives), but 55% did not remember and 42% did not understand all the information provided to them as a part of IC. Eighty-three percent wanted information about all possible risks associated with PCI. Over 80% of elective PCI participants had misconceptions about the outcomes of PCI, which did not match clinical trial evidence.
Conclusion: Subjects understood the general components of IC but did not precisely understand, or remember details, about information and the outcomes of PCI. Participants wanted to know both common and uncommon risks adding to the complexity of IC. Participants requested more family involvement in IC and information given in advance to help them to understand and remember information given during IC
Purpose: To evaluate patient understanding of the IC process and PCI outcomes.
Methods: A prospective cross-sectional survey was administered to a convenience sample treated with elective or urgent PCI at a single center in USA. Subjects completed the 36-item questionnaire to assess their understanding of the IC process, the risks benefits and potential outcomes of PCI. Items were rated on a scale of 1 completely agree to 5 completely disagree.
Results: Eighty-two subjects, mean age of 65 years, 64 (78%) males, 59 (72%) college-educated, completed the questionnaire after PCI. Forty-nine subjects (60%) were urgent cases. Forty seven percent received written information pre-PCI. Most (82%) recognized the key components of IC (choice, risk/benefit, alternatives), but 55% did not remember and 42% did not understand all the information provided to them as a part of IC. Eighty-three percent wanted information about all possible risks associated with PCI. Over 80% of elective PCI participants had misconceptions about the outcomes of PCI, which did not match clinical trial evidence.
Conclusion: Subjects understood the general components of IC but did not precisely understand, or remember details, about information and the outcomes of PCI. Participants wanted to know both common and uncommon risks adding to the complexity of IC. Participants requested more family involvement in IC and information given in advance to help them to understand and remember information given during IC
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 315 |
| Number of pages | 1 |
| Journal | European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing |
| Volume | 17 |
| Issue number | S1 |
| Early online date | 30 Jul 2018 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Aug 2018 |
| Event | Euro Heart Care 2018 - Dublin, Ireland Duration: 9 Jun 2018 → 9 Jun 2018 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1474515118787764 |
