We have identified efforts by research ers to investigate interventions which seek to improve information delivery and consideration of information to enhance  informed consent .
The interventions used consistently improve patient knowledge , an important prerequisite for informed consent .
This is encouraging and these measures could be widely employed although we are not able to say with confidence which types of interventions are preferable .
Our results should be interpreted with caution due to the high levels of heterogeneity associated with many of the main analyses although we believe there is broad evidence of beneficial outcomes for patients with the pragmatic application of interventions .
BACKGROUND Achieving informed consent is a core clinical procedure and is required before any surgical or invasive procedure is undertaken .
However , it is a complex process which requires patients be provided with information which they can underst and and retain , opportunity to consider their options , and to be able to express their opinions and ask questions .
There is evidence that at present some patients undergo procedures without informed consent being achieved .
OBJECTIVES To assess the effects on patients , clinicians and the healthcare system of interventions to promote informed consent for patients undergoing surgical and other invasive healthcare treatments and procedures .
AUTHORS ' CONCLUSIONS Informed consent is an important ethical and practical part of patient care .
Effect of evidence based risk information on “informed choice” in colorectal cancer screening: randomised controlled trial
Objective To compare the effect of evidence based information on risk with that of st and ard information on informed choice in screening for colorectal cancer . Design R and omised controlled trial with 6 months ’ follow-up . Setting German statutory health insurance scheme . Participants 1577 insured people who were members of the target group for colorectal cancer screening ( age 50 - 75 , no history of colorectal cancer ) .  Interventions Brochure with evidence based risk information on colorectal cancer screening and two optional interactive internet modules on risk and diagnostic tests ; official information leaflet of the German colorectal cancer screening programme ( control ) . Main outcome measure The primary end point was “ informed choice , ” comprising “ knowledge , ” “ attitude , ” and “ combination of actual and planned uptake . ” Secondary outcomes were “ knowledge ” and “ combination of actual and planned uptake . ” Knowledge and attitude were assessed after 6 weeks and combination of actual and planned uptake of screening after 6 months . Results The response rate for return of both question naires was 92.4 % ( n=1457 ) . 345/785 ( 44.0 % ) participants in the intervention group made an informed choice , compared with 101/792 ( 12.8 % ) in the control group ( difference 31.2 % , 99 % confidence interval 25.7 % to 36.7 % ; P<0.001 ) . More intervention group participants had “ good knowledge ” ( 59.6 % ( n=468 ) v 16.2 % ( 128 ) ; difference 43.5 % , 37.8 % to 49.1 % ; P<0.001 ) . A “ positive attitude ” towards colorectal screening prevailed in both groups but was significantly lower in the intervention group ( 93.4 % ( 733 ) v 96.5 % ( 764 ) ; difference −3.1 % , −5.9 % to −0.3 % ; P<0.01 ) . The intervention had no effect on the combination of actual and planned uptake ( 72.4 % ( 568 ) v 72.9 % ( 577 ) ; P=0.87 ) . Conclusions Evidence based risk information on colorectal cancer screening increased informed choices and improved knowledge , with little change in attitudes . The intervention did not affect the combination of actual and planned uptake of screening . Trial registration Current Controlled Trials IS RCT N47105521
We have identified efforts by research ers to investigate interventions which seek to improve information delivery and consideration of information to enhance  informed consent .
The interventions used consistently improve patient knowledge , an important prerequisite for informed consent .
This is encouraging and these measures could be widely employed although we are not able to say with confidence which types of interventions are preferable .
Our results should be interpreted with caution due to the high levels of heterogeneity associated with many of the main analyses although we believe there is broad evidence of beneficial outcomes for patients with the pragmatic application of interventions .
BACKGROUND Achieving informed consent is a core clinical procedure and is required before any surgical or invasive procedure is undertaken .
However , it is a complex process which requires patients be provided with information which they can underst and and retain , opportunity to consider their options , and to be able to express their opinions and ask questions .
There is evidence that at present some patients undergo procedures without informed consent being achieved .
OBJECTIVES To assess the effects on patients , clinicians and the healthcare system of interventions to promote informed consent for patients undergoing surgical and other invasive healthcare treatments and procedures .
AUTHORS ' CONCLUSIONS Informed consent is an important ethical and practical part of patient care .