RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Assessing the quality of written information provision for surgical procedures: a case study in oesophagectomy
JF BMJ Open
JO BMJ Open
FD British Medical Journal Publishing Group
SP e008536
DO 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008536
VO 5
IS 10
A1 N S Blencowe
A1 S Strong
A1 A G K McNair
A1 N Howes
A1 J Elliot
A1 K N Avery
A1 J M Blazeby
YR 2015
UL http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/10/e008536.abstract
AB Objective To examine the content and quality of written information provided by surgical centres for patients undergoing oesophagectomy for cancer.Design Cross-sectional study of the content of National Health Service (NHS) patient information leaflets (PILs) about oesophageal cancer surgery, using a modified framework approach.Data sources Written information leaflets from 41 of 43 cancer centres undertaking surgery for oesophageal cancer in England and Wales (response rate 95.3%).Eligibility criteria All English language versions of PILs about oesophagectomy.Results 32 different PILs were identified, of which 2 were generic tools (Macmillan ‘understanding cancer of the gullet’ and EIDO ‘oesophagectomy’). Although most PILs focused on describing in-hospital adverse events, information varied widely and was often misleading. Just 1 leaflet described survival benefits of surgery and 2 mentioned the possibility of disease recurrence.Conclusions Written information provided for patients by NHS cancer centres undertaking oesophagectomy is inconsistent and incomplete. It is recommended that surgeons work together with patients to agree on standards of information provision of relevance to all stakeholders’ needs.