Interventions to Improve Patient Comprehension in Informed Consent for Medical and Surgical Procedures: An Updated Systematic Review
Authors:
Open Access
- 16 January 2020
- journal article
- review article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Medical Decision Making
- Vol. 40 (2) , 119-143
Abstract
Background. Patient comprehension is fundamental to valid informed consent. Current practices often result in inadequate patient comprehension. Purpose. An updated review to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of interventions to improve patient comprehension in clinical informed consent. Data Sources. Systematic searches of MEDLINE and EMBASE (2008–2018). Study Selection. We included randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials evaluating interventions to improve patient comprehension in clinical informed consent. Data Extraction. Reviewers independently abstracted data using a standardized form, comparing all results and resolving disagreements by consensus. Data Synthesis. Fifty-two studies of 60 interventions met inclusion criteria. Compared with standard informed consent, a statistically significant improvement in patient comprehension was seen with 43% (6/14) of written interventions, 56% (15/27) of audiovisual interventions, 67% (2/3) of multicomponent interventions, 85% (11/13) of interactive digital interventions, and 100% (3/3) of verbal discussion with test/feedback or teach-back interventions. Eighty-five percent of studies (44/52) evaluated patients’ understanding of risks, 69% (41/52) general knowledge about the procedure, 35% (18/52) understanding of benefits, and 31% (16/52) understanding of alternatives. Participants’ education level was reported heterogeneously, and only 8% (4/52) of studies examined effects according to health literacy. Most studies (79%, 41/52) did not specify participants’ race/ethnicity. Limitations. Variation in interventions and outcome measures precluded conduct of a meta-analysis or calculation of mean effect size. Control group processes were variable and inconsistently characterized. Nearly half of studies (44%, 23/52) had a high risk of bias for the patient comprehension outcome. Conclusions. Interventions to improve patient comprehension in informed consent are heterogeneous. Interactive interventions, particularly with test/feedback or teach-back components, appear superior. Future research should emphasize all key elements of informed consent and explore effects among vulnerable populations.Keywords
Funding Information
- National Institute on Aging (K24AG054415)
- National Institutes of Health (K24DK102057)
- National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (T32AT003997)
- National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (R21AA025484)
- National Research Service Award (T32HP19025)
This publication has 78 references indexed in Scilit:
- Information disclosure in clinical informed consent: “reasonable” patient’s perception of norm in high-context communication cultureBMC Medical Ethics, 2014
- Interventions to promote informed consent for patients undergoing surgical and other invasive healthcare proceduresCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2013
- The effect of a visual aid on the comprehension of cataract surgery in a rural, indigent South Indian populationDigital Journal of Ophthalmology, 2011
- Patient Comprehension of an Interactive, Computer-Based Information Program for Cardiac CatheterizationArchives of internal medicine (1960), 2009
- Using computer agents to explain medical documents to patients with low health literacyPatient Education and Counseling, 2009
- A Randomised Trial of Conventional versus BAUS Procedure-Specific Consent Forms for Transurethral Resection of ProstateThe Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2009
- Patient-Physician Communication: Informed Consent for Imaging-Guided Spinal InjectionsJournal of the American College of Radiology, 2009
- Consent and medical treatment: The legal paradigm in IndiaIndian Journal of Urology, 2009
- Chapter 20 What are the differences between long-term, short-term, and working memory?2008
- Use of a modified informed consent process among vulnerable patientsJournal of General Internal Medicine, 2006