The Patients’ Perspective of Carotid Endarterectomy

• Published in: Vascular and endovascular surgery Vol. 44; no. 7; pp. 529 - 534
• Main Authors: Maruthappu, Mahiben, Shalhoub, Joseph, Thapar, Ankur, Jayasooriya, Gayani, Franklin, Ian J., Davies, Alun H.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01-10-2010; Sage Publications
• Subjects: Analgesia; Anesthesia, Local; Biological and medical sciences; Carotid Stenosis - complications; Carotid Stenosis - surgery; Comprehension; Endarterectomy, Carotid - adverse effects; Endarterectomy, Carotid - psychology; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Humans; Informed Consent; Intraoperative Care; London; Medical sciences; Neurology; Pain Measurement; Pain, Postoperative - etiology; Patient Education as Topic; Patient Satisfaction; Patients - psychology; Perception; Quality of Health Care; Stroke - etiology; Stroke - prevention & control; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases; Surveys and Questionnaires; Treatment Outcome; Vascular diseases and vascular malformations of the nervous system; Vascular surgery: aorta, extremities, vena cava. Surgery of the lymphatic vessels; London; patient satisfaction; carotid endarterectomy; informed consent; patient understanding; stroke; Human; Cardiovascular disease; Endarteriectomy; Carotid; Surgery
• ISSN: 1538-5744; 1938-9116
• DOI: 10.1177/1538574410374657

Introduction: No studies as yet have directly evaluated the patients’ perspective of carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Here, we determine patient satisfaction, understanding, and perception of CEA. Methods: Consecutive patients were identified from a prospectively maintained carotid database. A validated 10-point telephone questionnaire was conducted. Questions related to preoperative symptoms, experience of procedure, future interventions, and overall patient satisfaction. Results: Of the 192 patients included, 136 completed the questionnaire (71% response rate). Ninety-two percent were satisfied with the explanation received, however, only 48% understood that CEA aimed to prevent future stroke. Eighty-five percent of patients received local anesthesia (LA) CEA, with 16% reporting severe or unbearable pain. Most patients (83%) would repeat CEA if necessary and 67% stated a future preference for LA CEA. The majority of patients (96%) were satisfied with their treatment overall. Conclusions: Most patients were satisfied with CEA. Greater emphasis could be placed on improving preoperative information-giving and intraoperative analgesia.