ArticleBMJ open quality2025
Implementation of Digital Consent at Sandwell and West Birmingham NHS Trust: A Quality Improvement Project.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2025. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital consent systems provide a modern alternative to traditional paper-based methods, improving legibility, documentation accuracy, compliance with National Health Service (NHS) medicolegal standards and patient understanding. This quality improvement project evaluated the implementation of a digital consent system in the Trauma and Orthopaedics department at Sandwell and West Birmingham NHS Trust, comparing paper-based consent with the digital system. Baseline data were collected retrospectively from July to August 2024 and compared with prospective data following implementation from August to October 2024, using quantitative measures of documentation quality and qualitative feedback from healthcare professionals (n=24) and patient (n=619) surveys. An iterative Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle approach was used to refine the process.Following implementation, legibility improved from 42-48% to 100% across all digital consents, and documentation of alternative treatment options increased substantially from 5% to 95% in trauma cases and from 0% to 98% in elective cases. Risks and benefits were documented in 100% of digital consents. Patient and clinician surveys demonstrated high satisfaction, with a mean System Usability Score of 77.5, comparable to high-performing consumer technology platforms. Identified barriers included accessibility issues for less digitally literate patients and technical challenges such as digital signing on smaller devices. The transition to digital consent resulted in a cumulative cost saving of £2552.90 over the first 7 months.The introduction of digital consent significantly improved documentation quality, patient and clinician satisfaction and generated measurable cost savings. Ongoing challenges relating to accessibility and technical usability require targeted interventions. This project demonstrates the potential for digital consent systems to support efficient, sustainable and patient-centred care, with opportunities for broader adoption across NHS specialties.
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.