ArticleCureus2024
Informed Consent Practices for Hip Fracture Surgeries at a Tertiary Care Hospital in Wad Madani, Sudan.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- When 'No Surgery' Is Chosen: A Five-Domain Framework for Evaluating Ethical Consent in Non-Operative Hip Fracture Care.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAn essential component of medical ethics and practice is informed consent. The General Medical Council (GMC) and the Royal College of Surgeons of England (RCS) provide guidelines for obtaining valid consent. Failing to obtain sufficient or valid consent can have legal consequences. MATERIALS AND
methodsOver a period of two and a half months, from March 12 to May 28, 2022, a retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted to evaluate consenting practices for neck of femur fracture surgeries. A total of 88 patient consent forms were reviewed. The standard consent forms utilized in this study were those endorsed by the British Orthopaedics Association (BOA) and were based on the guidelines provided by the RCS and the GMC.
resultsResident surgical trainees and medical officers obtained the majority of the consents, 31 (35.22%) and 49 (55.68%), respectively. The most frequently reported risks included infection, blood clots (deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism), bleeding, and wound complications. Neurovascular injury was not mentioned in 75 (85.33%) consent forms. Additionally, hip stiffness, prosthetic dislocation, death, and leg length discrepancy were not discussed with any of the patients. Additionally, we observed that the diagnosis or reason for surgery was mentioned in only 60 (68.18%) consent forms. Furthermore, none of the forms specified the intended benefits, the necessity for a blood transfusion, or the patient identification details.
conclusionOur study revealed inadequate documentation of surgical risks in patient consent forms for neck of femur fracture surgeries, with orthopaedic-specific risks often overlooked. This issue likely results from insufficient orthopaedic training among the medical officers and junior resident trainees responsible for obtaining consent. We recommend induction teaching sessions to improve their understanding of standard consenting practices and associated risks, along with implementing patient identification stickers.
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.