ArticleJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine2015
Patient perceptions and recall of consent for regional anaesthesia compared with consent for surgery.
Article in Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06115720 (CIA), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
CIA: Consent in Anaesthesia, Prospective Randomised-controlled Trial
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient Attitudes and Awareness of Anesthesia Risks and Perioperative Instructions in Preoperative Anesthesia Clinics: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Survey in Digestive Endoscopic Patients.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- Bibliometric analysis of multimodal analgesia research in the perioperative period: trends, contributions, and emerging areas (2013-2023).Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- The involvement and autonomy of young children undergoing elective paediatric cardiac surgery: a qualitative study.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2022Article
- Are We Meeting the Current Standards of Consent for Anesthesia? An International Survey of Clinical Practice.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2020Article
- A survey of doctors at a UK teaching hospital to assess understanding of recent changes to consent law.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2017Article
- A review of consent practices and perspectives for pharmacogenetic testing.Pharmacogenomics · 2016Review
- No transformation without reconciliation.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2015Article
- Are we too focused on blocks, to care, for the patient as an individual who needs holistic care?Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
- Not just a separate consent for anesthesia!Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIn Britain, consent for surgery is documented using a Department of Health form signed by the surgeon and the patient. In contrast, anaesthetic procedures have no formalised consent process. Evidence on the process of consent for regional anaesthesia, and patient perceptions of this, is scarce outside obstetric practice. We aimed to determine patient recall and perceptions of consent for interscalene brachial plexus block and compared this to surgical consent for shoulder arthroplasty.
designProspective observational survey.
settingA specialist musculoskeletal centre, UK.
participantsForty-six patients (female:male 30:16, mean age 61 years) undergoing shoulder arthroplasty with interscalene brachial plexus block.
main outcome measuresRecall and understanding of consent for regional anaesthesia and surgery was examined using a semi-structured questionnaire 1-2 days after arthroplasty. Surgical consent forms and discussions recorded by the anaesthetist were examined in participants' medical notes to compare against the level of recall. Analysis to determine statistical significance was conducted using McNemar's test.
resultsRecall of surgical risks was overall significantly better than recall of brachial plexus block risks. Compared to their recollections of surgical risk, patients remembered fewer specific risks for brachial plexus block (p < 0.001). There were more patients unable to recall any risks when questioned about brachial plexus block than about their surgery (p < 0.05). One-third of patients did not regard the consent discussion about regional anaesthesia as important as consent for surgery and over one-quarter had not recognised the preoperative discussion about the brachial plexus block as a consent process similar to that conducted for surgery.
conclusionsFundamental misunderstandings about the consent process are prevalent. Future work in this area should seek to investigate how documentation of the consent process and patients' understanding of consent for regional anaesthesia can be improved.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.