Clinical Trials Logo

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

NCT number NCT03720834
Other study ID # STH20393
Secondary ID
Status Completed
Phase
First received
Last updated
Start date November 1, 2018
Est. completion date July 21, 2019

Study information

Verified date September 2019
Source Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
Contact n/a
Is FDA regulated No
Health authority
Study type Observational

Clinical Trial Summary

Before having an operation doctors use expressions such as high risk, or low risk to describe the chance of complications occurring. Complications include things such as strokes and heart attacks and even death. It is thought that using words like this, instead of percentages makes it easier for patients to understand their level of risk. It is also often hard for a doctor to give a patient an exact percentage.

It is important that patients have a good understanding about their level of risk associated with an operation so they can make informed decisions about whether to go ahead with it. This is an important part of taking consent before an operation.

The aim of this study is to assess whether using expressions such as high risk and low risk to communicate the chance of a complication occurring during an operation is useful.

Different patients may assign different meanings to these expressions. If it is found that patients interpret these expressions differently from how the doctor intended it would suggest that the way doctors communicate risk to patients should be reviewed.

Patients will be asked if they are willing to participate in the study and after giving consent they will complete a questionnaire. The questionnaire will list various expressions used by doctors to describe the chance of a complication occurring during an operation, such as high risk and low risk. Each participant will be asked to give a percentage for each of the expressions. The questionnaire will be completed by patients who are waiting to have an operation at the Royal Hallamshire Hospital.


Description:

Shared decision-making is central to the consent process prior to surgery and anaesthesia. Verbal probability expressions are commonly used by clinicians to help describe the level of risk. Common examples of verbal probability expressions are shown below with the estimated numerical risk shown in parentheses:

- High risk (1:100)

- Moderate risk (1:100-1:1000)

- Low risk (1:1000-1:10 000)

- Standard risk (varies depending on patient/procedure etc.)

- Very low risk (1:10 000)

- Minimal risk (1:100 000)

- Negligible risk (1:1 000 000)

Verbal probability expressions are commonly used because they are perceived as being easier to understand than, for example, percentage risk, as this is affected by how numerate a patient is. Clinicians often prefer verbal probability expressions as they avoid assigning an exact percentage of risk; this is because risk prediction is an inexact science and from an individual patient perspective, risk of complications is often a dichotomous outcome - their individual experience will be either a 0% or 100% incidence of complications, depending on whether it happens to them or not. Percentage risk only really applies to large populations, not individual patients.

Shared decision-making is central to the consent process prior to surgery and anaesthesia. With pre-operative clinics, risk indices are often described according to Calman's verbal scale illustrated above (high, moderate, low, very low etc.). However, the actual level of harm that is perceived by the patient and clinician may differ, due a variety of factors, not least a lack of understanding of the underlying numerical concepts. In addition, the level of risk assigned to these by clinicians and the level perceived by patients may differ. For example, a clinician may view a 20% probability of a complication after cancer surgery is high-risk, when compared to their own experience of the procedure; the patient who is living with the disease may see this as a low-risk, given their individual perception of the disease.

This study aims to investigate this and to see if verbal probability expressions are still useful for communication of pre-operative risk. If the study finds large inter-individual variability between patients, then this would suggest that the use of verbal probability expressions in discussions should be reviewed. This may include the need for verbal probability expressions to be used in conjunction with a numerical estimate of risk, or for the terms used (high-risk, low-risk) to be revised. The results of this study may have significant implications at national level in terms of the consent process for surgical procedures.

After gaining consent, a questionnaire with various verbal probability expressions will be completed by clinicians and patients. Each participant will be asked to assign a percentage of likelihood (i.e. a numerical translation) of an adverse outcome according to each verbal probability expression. For example, one patient may perceive the phrase 'high-risk" as an incidence risk in excess of 50%, whilst another may perceive the risk to be 20%.

A researcher will be available to answer any questions will occur during the completion of the questionnaire.

The study is observational.

The numerical translation of different verbal probability expressions will be displayed graphically to illustrate variation (if any). For example, if the phrase 'high-risk" is perceived by patients as a percentage risk ranging from 20-70%, whilst anaesthetists and surgeons perceive 'high-risk' as 10-20%, then this particular verbal probability expression would be of limited value.

We will use ANOVA to analyse if there is any difference in the level risk assigned to different verbal probability expressions by patients and anaesthetists (after testing for normality of data distribution). For example, do patients recognise a meaningful difference between low and minimal risk?

Regression analyses will also be undertaken to determine if any patient factors alter the perception of risk. This will include: sex; calculated Surgical Outcome Risk Tool score; cancer vs. non-cancer surgery; ethnicity; and surgical speciality.


Recruitment information / eligibility

Status Completed
Enrollment 347
Est. completion date July 21, 2019
Est. primary completion date July 21, 2019
Accepts healthy volunteers
Gender All
Age group 18 Years and older
Eligibility Inclusion Criteria:

- Any patient due to undergo surgery who attends pre-operative assessment clinic

Exclusion Criteria:

- Inability to speak/read English; inability to provide own consent.

Study Design


Related Conditions & MeSH terms


Locations

Country Name City State
United Kingdom Sheffield Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust Sheffield South Yorkshire

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor Collaborator
Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Country where clinical trial is conducted

United Kingdom, 

Outcome

Type Measure Description Time frame Safety issue
Primary To determine the perceived peri-operative risk (as a percentage incidence) associated with a variety of verbal probability expressions in patients awaiting surgery. Percentage risk assigned to verbal risk descriptors Day 0
Secondary To determine the implied patient peri-operative risk (as a percentage incidence) associated with a variety of verbal probability expressions that are used by clinicians in the pre-operative setting. Percentage risk assigned to verbal risk descriptors Day 0
Secondary To determine the level of correlation between clinicians and patient perception of risk when verbal probability expressions are used. Percentage risk assigned to verbal risk descriptors Day 0
Secondary To investigate the impact of patient sex, surgical speciality, presence of carcinoma, and calculated risk of surgery on patient perception of risk when verbal probability expressions are used. Logistic regression Day 0
See also
  Status Clinical Trial Phase
Completed NCT05062564 - Efficacy of LipiFlow in Patients Affected by Meibomian Gland Dysfunction in Reducing Post-cataract Surgery Dry Eye N/A
Completed NCT05346588 - THRIVE Feasibility Trial Phase 3
Completed NCT03930784 - A Real-world Study to Examine the Relationship Between Simple Physical Functioning Tests, Complications and Recovery Following Abdominal Surgery.
Not yet recruiting NCT04430972 - Immune Responsiveness and Outcome After Aortic Valve Surgery (Measure)
Recruiting NCT04887415 - Respiratory Strength Training in Cardiac Surgical Patients N/A
Recruiting NCT05254262 - Multicenter National Trial of Clinical Results of Surgical Elderly Patients
Recruiting NCT05155878 - Prognostic Factors in Periampullary Tumors and Cysts
Recruiting NCT03561376 - Zinc Oxide Versus Petrolatum Following Skin Surgery Early Phase 1
Recruiting NCT04967391 - Tumescence in HNC Skin Graft Reconstruction Phase 3
Terminated NCT03757455 - ERAS Protocol in Pancreaticoduodenectomy and Total Pancreatectomy N/A
Completed NCT03793816 - Tonsillectomy Using BiZactâ„¢ - a Randomized Side-controlled Clinical Trial N/A
Completed NCT03246165 - Predictive Factors and Complications of Delirium
Withdrawn NCT04090918 - Novel Methods for Characterizing Patients With Post-operative Atrial Fibrillation Secondary to Abdominal Surgery
Completed NCT05373238 - Same Day Discharge After Laparoscopic Hysterectomy
Completed NCT03938584 - The Effect of Vitamin C on Wound Healing In Mandibular Fracture Patients N/A
Not yet recruiting NCT05046925 - PACU for Postoperative Care After Major Thoracic and Abdominal Surgery
Completed NCT04550156 - Evaluation of the Introduction of a Colorectal Bundle in Left Sided Colorectal Resections N/A
Not yet recruiting NCT04199208 - Does Prehabilitation Improve Outcome in Coloncancer Surgery? N/A
Completed NCT04257344 - Use of Wearables for Early Detection of Complications After Major Acute Abdominal Surgery
Active, not recruiting NCT03721471 - Outcome of Very Old Patients Admitted for Elective Major Surgery, the Effect of Frailty