An unselected prospective consecutive series of 575 patients with a single adenocarcinoma of the colon and of 331 patients with a single &nocarcinoma of the W m registered between 1971 and 1984 at the Princess Alexandra Hospital is nported. The hunours were staged according to the Ausealian Clicopathological Staging (ACPS) System. Approximately onequarter of the patients were incurable when they presented. For curative operations for carcinoma of the colon. the operative mortality was 3%. For curative operations for carcinoma of h e rectum. the operative mortality was I % for abdominoperineal resection and 4.5% for anterior resection. The relative 5 year survival for all patients was 54.5%. The findings compared with other large Australian series as well as with series from the United Kingdom and the United States.

Purpose  To determine if patients presenting for colonoscopy can remember information discussed in the informed consent process. Focusing on whether patients know of the possible risks. Methodology  A prospective study of patients presenting for elective colonoscopy through the Colorectal Unit. Patients were consented in outpatient clinics prior to the procedure using the colonoscopy consent form supplied by Queensland Health. On the day of the procedure a 2 page questionnaire with 13 questions was completed by the patient prior to their colonoscopy. Indications for colonoscopy date of consent & procedure and seniority of consenting doctor were obtained from medical records. Results  100 patients completed the questionnaire. 94% of patients could correctly identify colonoscopy as the procedure being undertaken. 45% of patients were able to identify that there were any risks involved with the procedure. Only 28% of patients could name perforation as a possible risk. h regard to other investigative options 83% could not identify any from a list of three. Despite this 92% felt they were given enough information and were happy to proceed. Conclusion  This study highlights room for improvement in the current informed consent process. The current process falls short in educating patients of the possible serious risks involved. Patients do not recall other therapeutic options given. The consent process does convey basic information allowing the patient to identify the name of the investigation and anatomical area investigated. Despite these shortcomings most patients felt they were given enough information to proceed.