LAUSR

BACKGROUND The objective of this study was to determine the effects of using the Surgical Risk Preoperative Assessment System (SURPAS) on patient satisfaction and surgeon efficiency in the surgical informed consent process as compared to surgeons' "usual" consent process. STUDY DESIGN Patient perception of the consent process was assessed via survey in two cohorts: 10 surgeons in different specialties used their "usual" consent process for 10 patients; these surgeons were then taught to use SURPAS and employed it during the informed consent process of 10 additional patients. The data were compared using Fisher's exact test and the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test. RESULTS 100 patients underwent the "usual" consent process (USUAL) and 93 underwent SURPAS-guided consent (SURPAS). 82% of SURPAS were "very satisfied" and 18% were "satisfied" with risk discussion vs. 16% and 72% of USUAL. 75.3% of SURPAS reported the risk discussion made them "more comfortable" with surgery vs. 19% of USUAL. 90.3% of SURPAS reported "somewhat" or "greatly decreased" anxiety vs. 20% of USUAL. All p-values were <0.0001. 97.9% of SURPAS patients reported "enough time spent discussing risks" vs. 72.0% of USUAL. CONCLUSION The SURPAS tool improved the informed consent process for patients compared to the "usual" consent process, in terms of patient satisfaction, making patients feel more comfortable and less anxious about their impending operations. Providers should consider integrating the SURPAS tool into their preoperative consent process.