Assessing Informed Consent in Orthopaedic Surgery Trainees: Does Quality or Comfort Level Vary by Training Year?

INTRODUCTION: Obtaining adequate informed consent is a fundamental component of surgical care, often conducted by trainees at academic medical centers. However, the quality of trainees' informed consent remains unclear. To guide future instruction, this study assessed trainees' confidence and performance with the informed consent process, stratified by postgraduate year and previous consent education.

METHODS: An objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) was developed to assess informed consent discussions between housestaff trainees and standardized patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty. A total of 18 orthopaedic residents (six each in postgraduate years [PGYs] 1, 3, and 5) and five clinical fellows in adult reconstruction (PGY-6) participated. Quality of informed consent was assessed with an objective rubric, scored 0 to 2 ("not addressed," "attempted," and "completed"). Trainees completed a post-OSCE survey assessing their confidence and previous training in obtaining informed consent.

RESULTS: All 23 trainees considered informed consent "extremely important," and 96% thought that formal training would be "very" or "extremely beneficial." Yet, only 30% recalled receiving consent education, and 39% had never received clinical feedback on their consent process. Average OSCE performance was 16.2/20 (range: 11-19). Common deficiencies were assessing patient comprehension (13% completed) and facilitating shared decision making (39% completed). Only 35% of trainees identified assessing patient comprehension as critical. Performance did not differ significantly by training level. Previous consent education significantly improved trainees' ability to explain procedures (1.7/2.0 vs. 1.2/2.0; P = 0.013) and was associated with better shared decision-making facilitation (1.4/2.0 vs. 1.0/2.0; P = 0.255), although not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION: Orthopaedic trainees value formal informed consent training but lack structured education and informal feedback. While overall performance was strong, consistent deficiencies in assessing comprehension and shared decision making were noted. Seniority alone did not improve performance, while previous formal education improved procedure explanations. These findings support the implementation of structured informed consent curricula across all levels of orthopaedic training.