Affiliation:
1. ENT Department, Luton and Dunstable University Hospital, Bedfordshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Luton, UK
Abstract
The requirements for informed consent were modified in 2015 following the UK Supreme Court judgment of Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board. This marked a decisive shift from the traditional paternalistic ‘doctor knows best' model towards a more patient-centred approach. This study examines the current standard of consent for septoplasty and whether it complies with the law. We also report whether the ‘reasonable patient’ and surgeon agree about which risks should be discussed during the consent process. Ten complications were identified as common or serious via a literature search. Using questionnaires, 21 Ears, Nose and Throat surgeons were asked which of these they routinely discussed, and 103 patients were asked how seriously they regarded those complications. Results were compared using the Test of Proportions. Most surgeons routinely discuss all risks except negative change in sense of smell and numbness of upper incisors. The ‘reasonable patient’ regarded these two complications as serious or very serious. However, less than 70% of surgeons mentioned them. A significant proportion of Ears, Nose and Throat surgeons do not routinely mention all the risks that the ‘reasonable patient' would want to know about before undergoing a septoplasty. This may result in more clinical negligence claims, as managing a patient's reasonable expectations is an important factor.
Reference11 articles.
1. Complications in septoplasty based on a large group of 5639 patients
2. Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11
3. Bolam vs Friern Health Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582
4. Consent: Supported Decision Making. Royal College of Surgeons of England, www.rcseng.ac.uk/standards-and-research/standards-and-guidance/good-practice-guides/consent/ (accessed 15 June 2021).
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献