0
Ethics in Cardiopulmonary Medicine |

Informed Consent for Medical Procedures*: Local and National Practices

Constantine A. Manthous; Angela DeGirolamo; Christopher Haddad; Yaw Amoateng-Adjepong
Author and Funding Information

*From the Pulmonary and Critical Care Department, Bridgeport Hospital and Yale University School of Medicine, Bridgeport, CT.

Correspondence to: Constantine A. Manthous, MD, FCCP, Bridgeport Hospital, 267 Grant St, Bridgeport, CT 06610; e-mail: pcmant@bpthosp.org



Chest. 2003;124(5):1978-1984. doi:10.1378/chest.124.5.1978
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Background: No studies have assessed whether clinicians obtain informed consent for invasive medical procedures, and there are no explicit national standards to guide the process.

Hypothesis: Informed consent practices are inconsistent for commonly performed invasive medical procedures.

Methods: A simple questionnaire was electronically mailed and/or faxed to training program directors of critical care medicine and internal medicine departments, and to ICU directors in the state of Connecticut. The questionnaire listed common invasive medical procedures and asked the respondents to check those for which practitioners routinely obtain informed consent in their hospital.

Results: The three samples, national intensivists (88 respondents), Connecticut intensivists (29 respondents), and national internists (56 respondents) demonstrated heterogeneity of consenting practices. The rate of obtaining consent for common vascular access procedures ranged from 20 to 90%. The rates of obtaining consent for Foley catheterization and nasogastric intubation were uniformly < 10%, and those for endoscopic procedures were > 90%. Separate consent (beyond the general consent to treat) was not uniformly obtained for the transfusion of blood products (range, 74 to 93%) and common diagnostic medical procedures (eg, thoracentesis, paracentesis, or lumbar puncture; range, 77 to 96%). Surgical intensivists reported that the obtaining of consent for invasive procedures was less routine compared to medical intensivists. Lower rates of consent were noted by those respondents who used a “blanket” consent form, which was signed at the time of hospital admission, to cover subsequent procedures.

Conclusions: In this relatively small sample, there was no uniform practice of informed consent for commonly performed invasive medical procedures. Consent was routinely obtained for GI endoscopy, bronchoscopy, and medical research, and was not obtained for Foley catheterization and nasogastric intubation. The obtaining of consent for vascular cannulation and diagnostic procedures was not routine in the ICUs of a substantial number of respondents. Explicit standards that delineate specifically which procedures require consent may be required to assure more uniform practices.


Sign In to Access Full Content

MEMBER & INDIVIDUAL SUBSCRIBER

Want Access?

NEW TO CHEST?

Become a CHEST member and receive a FREE subscription as a benefit of membership.

Individuals can purchase this article on ScienceDirect.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal or buy individual articles.

Learn more about membership or Purchase a Full Subscription.

INSTITUTIONAL ACCESS

Institutional access is now available through ScienceDirect and can be purchased at myelsevier.com.

Sign In to Access Full Content

MEMBER & INDIVIDUAL SUBSCRIBER

Want Access?

NEW TO CHEST?

Become a CHEST member and receive a FREE subscription as a benefit of membership.

Individuals can purchase this article on ScienceDirect.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal or buy individual articles.

Learn more about membership or Purchase a Full Subscription.

INSTITUTIONAL ACCESS

Institutional access is now available through ScienceDirect and can be purchased at myelsevier.com.

Figures

Tables

References

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Sign In to Access Full Content

MEMBER & INDIVIDUAL SUBSCRIBER

Want Access?

NEW TO CHEST?

Become a CHEST member and receive a FREE subscription as a benefit of membership.

Individuals can purchase this article on ScienceDirect.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal or buy individual articles.

Learn more about membership or Purchase a Full Subscription.

INSTITUTIONAL ACCESS

Institutional access is now available through ScienceDirect and can be purchased at myelsevier.com.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Find Similar Articles
CHEST Journal Articles
PubMed Articles
Guidelines
  • CHEST Journal
    Print ISSN: 0012-3692
    Online ISSN: 1931-3543