rss
J Clin Pathol 2007;60:351-354 doi:10.1136/jcp.2006.038216
  • ACP Best practice

Experiences from the front-line routine consenting of surplus surgically removed tissue: without investment by the National Health Service fully informed consent for all is not available

  1. Janet Wheeler1,
  2. Monica Agarwal2,
  3. John Sugden3,
  4. Meriel Bladon3,
  5. Philip Quirke4
  1. 1Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust/University of Leeds Pathology and Tumour Biology, Leeds, UK
  2. 2North West Deanery, Preston, UK
  3. 3Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
  4. 4University of Leeds, Pathology and Tumour Biology, Leeds, UK
  1. Correspondence to:
    MrsJ Wheeler
    Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust/University of Leeds Pathology and Tumour Biology, Leeds LS1 3EX, UK; janet.wheeler{at}leedsth.nhs.uk
  • Accepted 2 August 2006
  • Published Online First 1 September 2006

Abstract

The study investigated the routine introduction of a new surgical consent form containing a tissue consent section to investigate patient attitudes to the use of surplus tissue for research (after the Alder Hey inquiry) and also the differing approaches by consent takers. All surgical consent forms received in histopathology for the same 2-month period in 2 consecutive years were analysed, recording available information about the specimen, the tissue consent section and, for the second year, the consent taker. The findings showed that <5% of patients whose views were recorded disagreed with the use of their tissue for research. They also showed that the number of completed forms sent to histopathology had increased but the pattern of completion had changed very little. A wide variation between departments and also between clinicians was apparent in the levels of completion of the tissue consent section, suggesting wide variability in the quality of the consenting process. When asked, patients rarely object (<5%) but if the highest standards of consent for surgical tissue are to be achieved and the wishes of patients to donate tissue are to be effectively recorded then new resources or approaches will be needed for this process.

Footnotes

  • Published Online First 1 September 2006

  • Funding: Genentech (San Francisco, California, USA) provided funding for JW’s salary.

  • Competing interests: None.

  • Ethical approval was not required as this study was an audit of the consent process.

  • This study was performed independently of the funding source and the employer organisations.

Latest from JCP Education

Latest from JCP Education

Register for free content


Free sample
This recent issue is free to all users to allow everyone the opportunity to see the full scope and typical content of JCP.
View free sample issue >>

Free archive
The full back archive is now available for JCP. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006, back to volume 1 issue 1.
Register to access the free archive >>

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.

  • Latest Pathology jobs

    Latest Pathology jobs