Evaluation of the readability of informed consent forms used in urology: Is there a difference between open, endoscopic, and laparoscopic surgery?

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate the readability levels of informed consent forms used in Turkey before urological surgery and to compare the readability levels of open, endoscopic, and laparoscopic surgical informed consent forms.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 529 informed consent forms used for urological open, endoscopic, and laparoscopic surgical procedures were collected from different hospitals in Turkey. Evaluating informed consent forms that have exactly the same text only once, a total of 69 consent forms were evaluated. The Gunning Fog Index and Flesch-Kincaid test measuring the general readability level were used to calculate the readability level of informed consent forms in addition to the Ateşman and Bezirci-Yılmaz formulas defined to determine the readability level of Turkish texts. Informed consent forms were evaluated and divided into three groups as open, endoscopic, and laparoscopic surgery forms, depending on their content.

RESULTS: Among 69 informed consent forms evaluated, 35 were open, 19 were endoscopic, and 15 were laparoscopic surgery consent forms. The readability level of all informed consent forms was detected as average according to the Ateşman formula, very difficult according to the Flesch-Kincaid test, difficult according to the Gunning Fog Index, and at the high school education level according to the Bezirci-Yılmaz formula. A statistical evaluation of the three groups did not show a significant difference in the readability level.

CONCLUSION: In this study, it was detected that the informed consent form readability levels used for urological surgical procedures in our country were rather low. We think that the cooperation of the concerned institutions is required for the revision of the consent information texts available and the improvement of the texts according to the strategies recommended.