[Informed consents readability in vascular surgery and its progress over time]

Background and objective: Doctors provide patients the information in written form by informed consents (IC), being the readability essential in the quality of care. The primary endpoint was to analyze the readability of IC published by the Chapter of Endovascular Surgery (CCEV) of the Spanish Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery (SEACV) in 2019, and its evolution to those published by the SEACV in 2007.

Materials and methods: The ICs were organized by sectors and we obtained the following parameters: syllables, words, phrases, average words/phrases and syllables/words, Flesch, Flesch-Szigriszt, Fernández-Huerta and Gunning-Fog indexes, as well as the grade on the Inflesz scale.

Results: The Flesch index classified the CCEV consents as very difficult, and the Gunning-Fog index reflected a readability equivalent to university texts. The Flesch-Szigriszt, Fernández-Huerta indexes and Inflesz scale classified them as normal. The ICs with less readability were those referring to supra-aortic trunks (SAT) and miscellaneous in the Fernández-Huerta (P<.020 and P<.05, respectively) and Flesch-Szigriszt (P<.05) indexes. However, ICs regarding venous pathology showed a better readability in this indexes (P<.006). CCEV consents were significantly longer than SEACV consents (P=.021). In addition, there was a decrease over time in the mean value of the Fernandez-Huerta and Flesch-Szigriszt indexes (P=.002).

Conclusions: Although CCEV consents had a normal readability, it has been observed a decrease in the readability indexes compared to those published in 2007 by the SEACV. In addition the length and content of the ICs should be reviewed, especially those relating to SAT and miscellaneous.