Or, a patient may come into your facility with a durable power of attorney for health care appointing someone, such as a daughter or husband, to provide consent. Again, the policy should be consulted and followed. A minor, someone who is 17 years and younger, is generally considered not competent to make informed consent decisions. In an emergency situation, if the patient, including a minor, is unable to provide his or her own consent, consent is presumed and treatment is provided absent directions to the contrary e.
Another general principle of informed consent is that it is the health care provider doing the procedure or treatment that obtains the informed consent of the patient, including a nurse midwife or nurse anesthetist, as examples.
Obtaining informed consent is a process that requires a detailed exchange of information concerning the treatment or procedure so that the patient can make a knowledgeable choice about the proposed plan. Generally, you are responsible for:. NY: Cambridge University Press. Psychol Health. Screening for proteinuria in US adults: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Hupcey JE. Maintaining validity: the development of the concept of trust. Inter J Qual Meth. Establishing and maintaining trust during acute care hospitalizations.
Sch Inq Nurs Pract. Goudge J, Gilson L. How can trust be investigated? Drawing lessons from past experience. An exploration and advancement of the concept of trust. J Adv Nurs. Studying physician effects on patient outcomes: physician interactional style and performance on quality of care indicators.
Patient trust: is it related to patient-centered behavior of primary care physicians? Med Care. British J Gen Prac. Exploring and validating patient concerns: relation to prescribing for depression. Patient-centered communication and diagnostic testing. Trust of Turkish and Arabic ethnic minority patients in their Dutch oncologist. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd Netherlands. How patient-physician encounters in critical medical situations affect trust: results of a national survey.
Patient characteristics associated with favorable perceptions of patient-provider communication in early-stage lung cancer treatment. J Health Commun. Shaw J Baker M. Expert-patient: dream or nightmare? The concept of a well-informed patient is welcome but a new name is in need. Brit Med J. Hagihara A, Kimio T. Doctor and patient perceptions of the level of doctor explanation and quality of patient—doctor communication.
Scand J Caring Sci. Health Aff. Patient self-worth and communication barriers to Trust of Israeli Patients in acute-care physicians at public general hospitals. Qual Health Res. Behind closed doors: management of patient expectations in primary care practices. Collaborative care for patients with depression and chronic illnesses. Quality of life in schizophrenia: the impact of psychopathology, attitude toward medication, and side effects.
J Clin Psychiatry. Patient characteristics and experiences associated with trust in specialist physicians. Patient trust in the physician: relationship to patient requests. Med Fam Prac. Patient fear of anesthesia complications according to surgical type: potential impact on informed consent for anesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scan.
Qualitative methods. Meth Med Ethics. Charmaz K. Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage Publications; Dworkin SL. Sample size policy for qualitative studies using in-depth interviews; Sample size in qualitative interview studies: guided by information power.
Qualitative health research. Mason M. Sample size and saturation in PhD studies using qualitative interviews. Forum: Qualit Soc Res. Naturalistic inquiry.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage; Book Google Scholar. Narrative and the self as relationship. Advan in Exper Soc Psych. Polkinghorne JC. The faith of a physicist: reflections of a bottom-up thinker. Spector-Mersel G. Mechanisms of selection in claiming narrative identities: a model for interpreting narratives. Qual Inq. Chase SE. Narrative inquiry: multiple lenses, approaches, voices.
The handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage; Riessman CK. Narrative methods for the human sciences. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publishing; Narrative Works. Measuring critical deficits in shared decision making before elective surgery.
Naidoo S. Obtaining informed consent for surgery: ethics. Curr Allergy Clin Immu. Sheikhtaheri A, Farzandipour M. Factors associated with quality of informed consent in patients admitted for surgery: an Iranian study.
Mead N, Bower P. Patient-centredness: a conceptual framework and review of the empirical literature. Cook C, Brunton M. Pastoral power and gynecological examinations: a Foucauldian critique of clinician accounts of patient-centered consent. Socio Health Illness. Corrigan O. Empty ethics: the problem with informed consent.
Sociol Health Illn. Nussbaum MC. Phil Pub Affairs. Langton R. Sexual solipsism: Philosophical essays on pornography and objectification. Experimental evidence showing that physician guidance promotes perceptions of physician empathy.
The effects of physician empathy on patient satisfaction and compliance. Eval Health Prof. Depression, anxiety, and cardiac morbidity outcomes after coronary artery bypass surgery: a contemporary and practical review. Organizational values in the provision of access to care for the uninsured.
AJOB empir Bio. Ethics: conscientious objection in medicine. Deliberative engagement methods for patient-centered outcomes research. Patient-Patient-Centered Outcomes Res. Ethics, oversight, and quality improvement initiatives. BMJ Qual Saf. Tobias JS. Changing the BMJ's position on informed consent would be counterproductive. British Med J. Improving informed consent: stakeholder views.
Malik AY. Gabay, G. In press. What do patients want? Surgical informed consent and patient-centered care — An Augmented model of information disclosure. Download references. You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar. GG conducted interviews. GG and YBC contributed equally to literature search, writing drafts, reviewing the final draft and the revised version. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript. Gillie Gabay Ph.
She studies Health psychology focusing on patient trust and Bioethics. She is a guest reviewer of several journals. She specializes in Sociology of health and bioethics, and studies families and reproductive technologies. Her current research project focuses on ethical aspects of posthumous reproduction. Correspondence to Gillie Gabay. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants. Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Reprints and Permissions. Infringement of the right to surgical informed consent: negligent disclosure and its impact on patient trust in surgeons at public general hospitals — the voice of the patient.
BMC Med Ethics 20, 77 Download citation. Received : 05 May Accepted : 06 September Published : 28 October Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:. Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative.
Skip to main content. Search all BMC articles Search. Download PDF. Abstract Background There is little dispute that the ideal moral standard for surgical informed consent calls for surgeons to carry out a disclosure dialogue with patients before they sign the informed consent form.
Methods Informants were 12 Israelis 6 men and 6 women , aged 29—81, who underwent life-saving surgeries. Discussion Similarity among jarring experiences of participants led us to contend that the conduct of nullifying surgical informed consent does not stem solely from constraints of time and resources, but may reflect an underlying paradox preserving this conduct and leading to objectification of patients and persisting in paternalism. Background Surgeons have a duty to conduct a surgical informed-consent discussion with patients prior to surgery.
Results The findings, based on patient experiences with surgical IC, indicate deficiencies in the information disclosure, recommendations, and understanding before participants underwent life-saving surgery.
Deficiency in implementation of regulatory guidelines More than half of the participants were instructed to sign the IC form without any discussion before they underwent surgery, thereby violating guidelines of informing patients of risks, implications, and identity of the surgeon.
Ron tells us something along the same lines: They explained nothing to me. Deficiency in sufficient type and amount of disclosure In their narratives, participants reflected on their expectations of surgeons to update them promptly about the surgery plan, to share information about how they will feel post-operative, the extent of the expected level of pain, and more.
Ron describes it: Meanwhile, it was 9 p. Some participants felt they were transparent; for example, Alona said: At last my turn arrived. Full size image. Conclusions Having edged back from either soft or hard paternalism, it is now time for a renewed effort to construct a conscious, practical, trust-facilitating process of surgical IC [ 87 ]. Availability of data and materials Authors have no permission to share the raw data. References 1. Google Scholar 2. Article Google Scholar 3.
Article Google Scholar 7. Article Google Scholar 8. Article Google Scholar 9. Article Google Scholar Google Scholar Book Google Scholar Acknowledgements None. Consent to publish clinical personal details that compromise anonymity of participants Non-applicable. Funding There was no funding for this study.
View author publications. Consent for publication The informed consent written and verbal form included consent to participate and to publish. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
About this article. Patients have the right to refuse treatment, provided they have capacity. They should be made aware of the likely consequences of their decision, as well as alternatives. Consent should be sought by a doctor or surgeon trained to perform the procedure, but the process may be delegated to another consultant or registrar.
As a foundation doctor, there will be several procedures for which you will need to obtain verbal consent, but it will be uncommon for you to carry out procedures that require written consent there are some exceptions, such as HIV testing. As a junior member of the team, you can spend time with patients to check their understanding of the procedure. Patients experience better outcomes when they feel supported. Before an operation can go ahead, a consent form must be completed. Having a thorough discussion with patients can minimise the risk of later medical negligence claims.
Concentric is a digital consent and shared decision making web application which transforms the paper process of giving consent for a procedure.
Evidence-based information which is personalised to the individual is included for over procedures to facilitate a shared conversation, and support understanding both within and outside the consultation room. The end-to-end journey is transformed: from facilitating a better consultation, digital signature capture, patient access to personalised information at home, to in theatre review of key consent information.
As a medical student, although you will not be responsible for obtaining consent, you can observe senior doctors following the consent process:. Explain the diagnosis - Check the patient understands their diagnosis, the findings that have led you to this diagnosis, and their prognosis if left untreated. Gauge what the patient already knows about their condition in order to clarify any misunderstandings. Explain the supported decision making process - Reassure the patient that the consent process is a shared decision, that you will support them through it, and that they can withdraw their consent at any time.
Ask them what matters to them. Different patients have different priorities, perspectives about what constitutes a material risk, and what risks are acceptable. Also, in this discussion you might learn about their fears, important family relationships, or previous clinical experiences that might influence their decision.
0コメント