SP7.2.3 Documentation of risk discussions prior to elective inguinal hernia surgery, is it standardised for all?

Abstract

Abstract Aims Obtaining consent is fundamental to surgical practice. Rising levels of litigation have led to increased scrutiny of the process. The Royal College of Surgeons (RCS) recommends a structured consent process enabling patients to make better informed decisions, increasing the legal robustness of the process. Our aim is to audit the documentation of risk discussions prior to elective inguinal hernia repair (EIHR). Methods Data was collected retrospectively for all patients who had undergone EIHR in a single surgical unit between January 2019 and 2020. Outpatient clinic letters and consent forms were reviewed. The grade of surgeon and documentation of consent discussions were recorded. The results were then analysed using basic statistical analysis. Results 146 patients (137 male and 9 female) were included in the audit, with an average age of 63 years (range 20-89 years). 77% of clinic letters recorded a consent discussion. Of these, chronic pain was the risk most commonly documented (62%), followed by recurrence (56%). 19.8% of clinic letters included the level of risk quoted. 86% of consent forms were legible. Documentation of risk was significantly more detailed on consent forms compared to clinic letters (p < 0.05). On these, infection was the most commonly documented (97%), followed by bleeding (91%). Overall, there was no significant difference in documentation relative to surgical grade. Conclusions This study has demonstrated considerable variability in consent process prior to EIHR. This can have both legal implications and impact upon patient experience. Adopting a strategy to ensure a consistent approach is essential.