ReviewNigerian medical journal : journal of the Nigeria Medical Association
Assessment of Informed Consent Practices in Surgical Procedures at a Tertiary Care Hospital of Northeast India: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Review in Nigerian medical journal : journal of the Nigeria Medical Association. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Informed consent is an ethical and legal prerequisite for surgical care, yet its quality and comprehensibility vary widely across clinical settings. Factors such as communication barriers, limited patient understanding, and time constraints, especially in emergency surgeries, can compromise the consent process. This study assessed the quality of informed consent practices in major surgical departments of a tertiary care hospital in Northeast India and examined determinants of patient understanding and satisfaction. Methodology: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 400 postoperative patients recruited consecutively from General Surgery, Orthopaedics, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, ENT, and Ophthalmology departments. Data were collected using a pre-validated Informed Consent Quality (ICF) checklist, a structured interview schedule, and a five-point satisfaction scale. Statistical analysis included chi-square tests, independent t-tests, ANOVA, Pearson's correlation, multivariable logistic regression to identify predictors of satisfaction, and multiple linear regressions to determine predictors of ICF quality. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The mean ICF Quality Score was 7.8 ± 1.9, and the mean Satisfaction Score was 4.1 ± 0.8. Elective surgeries showed significantly higher ICF quality and satisfaction than emergency procedures (p < 0.05). Time spent on consent (β = 0.34, p < 0.001), patient awareness (β = 0.28, p < 0.001), and understanding (β = 0.22, p < 0.001) emerged as independent predictors of ICF quality. Satisfaction was significantly associated with higher ICF scores, local language use, and adequate discussion of complications. Emergency status remained a negative predictor in regression analysis. Conclusion: Effective communication, adequate time allocation, and use of local language substantially improve the ethical quality of surgical informed consent. Structured templates and AETCOM-based training may strengthen consent practices in Indian teaching hospitals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42544192PMC13429079What 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.