Varicose Veins (VV) affect one-third of the adult population and chronic venous disease (CVD)
has a negative effect on quality of life (QoL), which can be significantly improved by
treatment.[1-4] Chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) can be complicated by venous ulceration in
over 3% of patients, and chronic treatment with dressings has been estimated to consume 2% of
the health budget. Over the last 15 years, minimally invasive endovenous techniques to treat
VV have been introduced and are proven to be cost-effective and safe, particularly when
performed under a local anaesthetic in an outpatient setting.[5] The American Venous Forum,
in 2011, and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence NICE), in 2013, have
recommended endovenous thermal ablation (EVTA) techniques, as the first-line treatments for
truncal reflux.[6,7]
As doctors, there is a legal requirement and duty of care to ensure patients are enabled to
make an informed decision about their treatment, including discussion of the benefits, risks
and alternative treatments. This is reflected in the Health Service Executive (HSE) National
Consent Policy and Irish Medical Council 'Guide to Professional Conduct and Ethics'. [8] A
patient centered approach to consent has been firmly established in Ireland since 2000, it
reinforces that there is a duty to involve patients in decisions about treatments and to
engage in a dialogue that offers comprehensible information. This is in keeping with the
fundamental ethical principle of autonomy.[8]
Interventions to improve information transfer and comprehension in the consent process [9],
such as standard Patient Information Leaflets (PIL) report mixed results. Information
leaflets used during the process of consent have been shown to increase patient factual
recall and satisfaction with the consent process and are considered best practice. [10-15]
However, even well considered PILs, co-designed with patient or client engagement, do not
always cover the less common areas of concern or risk which may be material to an individual
patient. [9] More rigorous approaches are time and cost intensive, and can adversely impact
on the efficiency of healthcare delivery, which limits scalability.
Telemedicine has revolutionised the delivery of care to patients in the modern era of
computers, tablets, and smartphones and its use has been rapidly expanded.[16] Digital
platforms are a novel tool to potentially improve dialogue and communication between doctors
and patients. Patients in general have high satisfaction ratings for telemedicine, but
certain patient-groups may be less likely to engage or benefit from it on account of
disability, technological illiteracy or access.[16] The use of novel digital technologies can
offer a low cost, accessible and tailored solution.
Thus the rationale for this study is to investigate whether it is feasible and acceptable to
deliver a digital health education intervention to patients to supplement the consent
process.