ReviewCureus2025
Informed Consent in Shoulder and Elbow Surgery.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Informed consent is essential for patient autonomy and shared decision-making but remains inconsistent in orthopaedic surgery. Shoulder and elbow procedures present unique challenges, with complex functional outcomes, diverse patient demographics, and high medicolegal exposure. Despite the clinical and legal importance of informed consent, evidence describing current practices in this subspecialty is limited. This review aimed to synthesize the literature on consent in shoulder and elbow surgery, identify barriers to effective communication, and highlight strategies to improve patient understanding and engagement. Peer-reviewed literature was identified through searches of PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus from database inception through September 11, 2025. Eligible studies addressed informed consent in shoulder and elbow surgery, including consent quality, patient comprehension, expectations, communication interventions, or medicolegal outcomes. Studies not directly addressing informed consent in this context were excluded. Findings reveal limited quantitative data on consent quality, despite high malpractice rates and frequent citation of inadequate consent in litigation. Key barriers include low health literacy, language discordance, insufficient physician training, and time constraints. Patient expectations vary by occupation, gender, and age, emphasizing the need for individualized consent discussions. Proposed solutions emphasize multifaceted, patient-centered approaches: the teach-back method to confirm comprehension, plain-language explanations supported by visual aids, structured resident training to improve communication, timely access to professional interpreter services, and greater workforce diversity to strengthen rapport. Future research should focus on validating specialty-specific consent frameworks, integrating digital adjuncts such as videos or surgery-specific forms, and adopting quantitative outcome measures to evaluate effectiveness. System-wide implementation of these strategies could enhance autonomy, build trust, reduce medicolegal risk, and improve outcomes in shoulder and elbow surgery.
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.