[Does a physician have to inform the patient about the rare risk of priapism before administering an anticoagulant?]

Author: VogelerMarcus

Paper Details 
Original Abstract of the Article :
There are no pharmaceuticals without side effects. Primary care physicians and especially hospital staff have to ask themselves every time they are administering medication whether they should inform the patient about possible risks and alternative treatment options. The "bizarre" side effects which...See full text at original site
Dr.Camel IconDr.Camel's Paper Summary Blogラクダ博士について

ラクダ博士は、Health Journal が論文の内容を分かりやすく解説するために作成した架空のキャラクターです。
難解な医学論文を、専門知識のない方にも理解しやすいように、噛み砕いて説明することを目指しています。

* ラクダ博士による解説は、あくまで論文の要点をまとめたものであり、原論文の完全な代替となるものではありません。詳細な内容については、必ず原論文をご参照ください。
* ラクダ博士は架空のキャラクターであり、実際の医学研究者や医療従事者とは一切関係がありません。
* 解説の内容は Health Journal が独自に解釈・作成したものであり、原論文の著者または出版社の見解を反映するものではありません。


引用元:
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00113-018-0521-8

データ提供:米国国立医学図書館(NLM)

Informed Consent: Navigating the Complexities of Rare Side Effects

The world of [pharmaceuticals] is riddled with potential side effects, both common and rare. This case study delves into the legal ramifications of [informed consent] when it comes to rare but potentially serious side effects. The case involved a patient who experienced [anticoagulant-induced priapism] after surgery. The court had to determine whether the hospital had a legal obligation to inform the patient about this rare side effect and alternative treatment options. The findings of this case provide valuable insights into the legal and ethical considerations surrounding informed consent in medical practice.

Transparency and Communication: The Importance of Open Dialogue

The court ruled that while hospitals are not legally obligated to inform patients about every possible side effect, especially those that are rare, they are required to engage in open and honest communication about potential risks and alternatives. The case highlights the importance of engaging patients in a meaningful dialogue about their treatment options, empowering them to make informed decisions. This approach fosters a sense of trust and transparency between healthcare providers and their patients.

A Shared Responsibility: Navigating the Labyrinth of Medical Information

This case underscores the shared responsibility of both healthcare providers and patients in ensuring informed consent. Healthcare providers must strive to provide patients with clear and concise information about potential risks and benefits, while patients must actively engage in the process of understanding their treatment options. Just as a camel navigates the intricate pathways of the desert, we must navigate the complex landscape of medical information with diligence and open communication.

Dr.Camel's Conclusion

This case reminds us that the journey through medical treatment is a shared path, requiring open dialogue, transparency, and a commitment to patient empowerment. Just as a camel relies on its intuition to navigate the vast desert, we must trust our instincts and seek clarity when it comes to our healthcare decisions. Keep asking questions, keep seeking knowledge, and keep striving for a healthcare system that prioritizes informed consent and patient empowerment.

Date :
  1. Date Completed 2019-09-06
  2. Date Revised 2019-09-06
Further Info :

Pubmed ID

29947832

DOI: Digital Object Identifier

10.1007/s00113-018-0521-8

Related Literature

SNS
PICO Info
in preparation
Languages

German

Positive IndicatorAn AI analysis index that serves as a benchmark for how positive the results of the study are. Note that it is a benchmark and requires careful interpretation and consideration of different perspectives.

This site uses cookies. Visit our privacy policy page or click the link in any footer for more information and to change your preferences.