Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T14:23:14.771Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Impact of written information describing postoperative pain management on patient agreement with proposed treatment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 November 2008

M. Binhas ,
F. Roudot-Thoraval ,
D. Thominet ,
P. Maison  and
J. Marty
M. Binhas*
Affiliation:
Université Paris XII, Hôpital Henri-Mondor, Assistance Publique–Hôpitaux de Paris, Department of Anesthesiology and Surgical Intensive Care, Créteil, France Université Paris XII, Hôpital Henri-Mondor, Committee Working Against Pain, Créteil, France
F. Roudot-Thoraval
Affiliation:
Université Paris XII, Hôpital Henri-Mondor, Department of Public Health, Créteil, France
D. Thominet
Affiliation:
Université Paris XII, Hôpital Henri-Mondor, Department of Organizations–Quality Management of Risks, Créteil, France
P. Maison
Affiliation:
Université Paris XII, Hôpital Henri-Mondor, Clinical Pharmacology and Research Unit, Créteil, France
J. Marty
Affiliation:
Université Paris XII, Hôpital Henri-Mondor, Assistance Publique–Hôpitaux de Paris, Department of Anesthesiology and Surgical Intensive Care, Créteil, France
*
Correspondence to: Michèle Binhas, Service d’Anesthésie–Réanimation, Hôpital Henri-Mondor, 51, avenue du Maréchal-de-Lattre-de-Tassigny, 94010 Créteil Cedex, France. E-mail: michele.binhas@hmn.aphp.fr; Tel: +33 1 49 81 21 11; Fax: +33 1 49 81 49 30
Get access

Summary

Background and objectives

Because patients who are to undergo surgery must give their consent to planned postoperative care, clear and complete information on postoperative pain management should be given. The aim of this quality-of-care study was to evaluate by inquiry the impact of written information describing postoperative pain management on the quality and type of information retained, and patient participation in discussing and agreeing to the postoperative pain management programme during the presurgical anaesthesiology consultation.

Methods

Prospective before and after interventional surveys, each lasting 3 weeks and conducted at a 6-month interval (time required to prepare the written information), used a standardized anonymous questionnaire given to patients after the anaesthesiology consultation. Questions requiring a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response assessed the quality of information and what information was retained by the patient, the extent of the patient’s interaction during the discussion with the anaesthesiologist and his/her agreement with the postoperative pain management programme.

Results

Among the 180 before-group patients included, 16.7% reported receiving verbal information during the anaesthesiology consultation, none retained all seven principal side-effects of morphine, 14.4% considered the information to be thorough, 20.6% understood it, 16.7% claimed that it had helped them participate in the discussion and 14.4% concurred with the postoperative pain management programme. Compared to the before inquiry, significantly higher percentages of the 107 after-group patients (given written information before the anaesthesiology consultation) responded as having received verbal information during the anaesthesiology consultation (57.0%), retained morphine’s main side-effects (12.1%), deemed the information thorough (58.9%) and understandable (53.3%), had participated in the discussion (47.7%) and agreed with the postoperative pain management programme (51.4%).

Conclusion

Written information on postoperative pain management distributed before the presurgical anaesthesiology consultation improved the quality of information retained, facilitated discussion with the anaesthesiologist and patient agreement with the postoperative pain management programme.

Keywords

PAINACUTE AND POSTOPERATIVEHEALTH SURVEYPATIENT EDUCATION HANDOUTANAESTHESIOLOGY
Type
Original Article
Information
European Journal of Anaesthesiology , Volume 25 , Issue 11 , November 2008 , pp. 884 - 890
Copyright
Copyright © European Society of Anaesthesiology 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Agence Nationale d’Accréditation et d’Évaluation en Santé, Information des patients: Recommandations destinées aux médecins. March 2000.Google Scholar
2.Lee, A, Chui, PT, Gin, T. Educating patients about anesthesia: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials of media-based interventions. Anesth Analg 2003; 96: 1424–1431.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Snyder-Ramos, SA, Seintsch, H, Bottiger, BW et al. Patient satisfaction and information gain after the preanesthetic visit: a comparison of face-to-face interview, brochure, and video. Anesth Analg 2005; 100: 1753–1758.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Cheung, A, Finegan, BA, Torok-Both, C, Donnelly-Warner, N, Lujic, J. A patient information booklet about anesthesiology improves preoperative patient education. Can J Anaesth 2007; 54: 355–360.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Albaladejo, P, Mann, C, Moine, P et al. Impact of an information booklet on patient satisfaction in anesthesia. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 2000; 19: 242–248.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Asehnoune, K, Albaladejo, P, Smail, N et al. Information and anesthesia: what does the patient desire? Ann Fr Anesth Réanim 2000; 19: 577–581.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Bugge, K, Bertelsen, F, Bendtsen, A. Patients’ desire for information about anaesthesia: Danish attitudes. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1998; 42: 91–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Kennedy, S, Hutchison, GL. Patients’ desire for information about anaesthesia: change in Scottish attitudes over five years. Health Bull 1996; 54: 118–121.Google ScholarPubMed
9.Lonsdale, M, Hutchison, GL. Patients’ desire for information about anaesthesia. Scottish and Canadian attitudes. Anaesthesia 1991; 46: 410–412.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Farnill, D, Inglis, S. Patients’ desire for information about anaesthesia: Australian attitudes. Anaesthesia 1994; 49: 162–164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Lithner, M, Zilling, T. Pre- and postoperative information needs. Patient Educ Couns 2000; 40: 29–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Timmons, ME, Bower, FL. The effect of structured preoperative teaching on patients’ use of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) and their management of pain. Orthop Nurs 1993; 12: 23–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Griffin, MJ, Brennan, L, McShane, AJ. Preoperative education and outcome of patient controlled analgesia. Can J Anaesth 1998; 45: 943–948.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Chumbley, GM, Ward, L, Hall, GM, Salmon, P. Pre-operative information and patient-controlled analgesia: much ado about nothing. Anaesthesia 2004; 59: 354–358.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Lam, KK, Chan, MT, Chen, PP, Kee, WD. Structured preoperative patient education for patient-controlled analgesia. J Clin Anesth 2001; 13: 465–469.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Greenberg, RS, Billett, C, Zahurak, M, Yaster, M. Videotape increases parental knowledge about pediatric pain management. Anesth Analg 1999; 89: 899–903.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Binhas, M, Gueri, C, Rezaigua-Delclaux, S, Benhamou-Jantelet, G, Duvaldestin, P. Can a preliminary survey help to elaborate information to patient sheet? Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 2003; 22: 562–563.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Kindler, CH, Szirt, L, Sommer, D, Häusler, R, Langewitz, W. A quantitative analysis of anaesthetist–patient communication during the pre-operative visit. Anaesthesia 2005; 60: 53–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19.Scott, NB, Hodson, M. Public perceptions of postoperative pain and its relief. Anaesthesia 1997; 52: 438–442.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Shevde, K, Panagopoulos, G. A survey of 800 patients’ knowledge, attitudes, and concerns regarding anesthesia. Anesth Analg 1991; 73: 190–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21.Johnson, A, Sandford, J, Tyndall, J. Written and verbal information versus verbal information only for patients being discharged from acute hospital settings to home: systematic review. Health Educ Res 2005; 4: 423–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Chan, Y, Irish, JC, Wood, SJ et al. Patient education and informed consent in head and neck surgery. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002; 128: 1269–1274.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.Langdon, IJ, Hardin, R, Learmonth, ID. Informed consent for total hip arthroplasty: does a written information sheet improve recall by patients? Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2002; 84: 404–408.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24.Mazur, DJ, Hickam, DH, Mazur, MD, Mazur, MD. The role of doctor’s opinion in shared decision making: what does shared decision making really mean when considering invasive medical procedures? Health Expect 2005; 8: 97–102.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25.McNutt, RA. Shared medical decision making. JAMA 2004; 292: 2516–2518.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed