[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 18.207.240.35. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 1,305
Citations 0
Invited Commentary
October 30, 2019

Interventions to Improve Informed Consent: Perhaps Surgeons Should Speak Less and Listen More

Author Affiliations
  • 1The MacLean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
  • 2Department of Surgery, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
JAMA Surg. 2020;155(1):13-14. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2019.3796

High-quality informed consent is central to the ethical practice of surgery. In this issue of JAMA Surgery, Schwarze and colleagues1 report on a novel attempt to increase patient engagement and well-being by sending older surgical patients a question prompt list (QPL) before their visit with a surgeon. For older patients undergoing high-risk operations, the authors have appropriately pointed out that the surgical procedure is often the start of a lengthy hospitalization and subsequent substantial changes in their ability to live independently or return to preoperative health status. They sought to improve the informed consent process for this group of vulnerable patients by working with surgeons to develop an informational brochure with a list of 11 questions to prompt patients and family members to ask their surgeons about treatment options, expectations for recovery, and management of potential serious complications.

Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    1 Comment for this article
    Professionalism
    Lawrence Danto, Professor retired | UCDavis, Michigan
    In all things be an observer first, a listener next, and a commenter last.  But if you comment, avoid “I”, “Me”, and “We”. Look beyond yourself - this is essential to all good science and clinical practice.  It is the essence of professionalism.
    CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None Reported
    ×