PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 16217938

Informed consent: does practice match conviction?

Jennifer King
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The need to obtain consent is an ethical principle and a legal requirement in health care that must be applied in practice. Dentists must give people the appropriate information about treatment options, risks, and benefits so that they are able to make informed choices before giving their free consent to any dental intervention. The British research reported on here supports the view that dentists generally have positive views about informed consent. But the companion program of observation of dentists in the clinic suggests that they do not have a systematic approach to obtaining consent and that patients are often told what is going to be done rather than asked. Dentists must approach informed consent more systematically, recognizing it as an integral part of treatment planning with the patient as developing the communication skills needed to do it well.

Explore related subjects

CommunicationDentistsHumansInformed ConsentInterviews as TopicPractice Patterns, Dentists'Surveys and QuestionnairesEmpirical ApproachProfessional Patient RelationshipJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jennifer King. 2005. Informed consent: does practice match conviction?. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16217938/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Information-sharing among couples considering multifetal pregnancy reduction.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the information-sharing strategies of couples considering fetal reduction, and the impact of these strategies on the chances of encountering hostility in their social networks. DESIGN: Cross-sectional design of semistructured qualitative interviews, coded with respect to sharing strategies and level of personally directed hostility encountered. SETTING: Multiple Pregnancy Management Program, Comprehensive Genetics, New York, New York. PATIENT(S) AND INTERVENTION(S): Fifty women and their partners who were making a first visit to our maternal-fetal management facility, in order to consider the possibility of multifetal reduction as a pregnancy-management strategy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Development of information-sharing strategies, and the chances of encountering personally directed hostility regarding multifetal reduction associated with more and less selective strategies. RESULT(S): Four information-sharing strategies emerged from the analysis. Two of these strategies were relatively open (extended network, and both parents). Two other strategies were relatively selective (qualified family and friends, and defended relationship). The selective strategies were significantly less likely to encounter to encounter personally directed hostility (odds ratio, 3.88; 95% confidence intervals, 0.87-17.30). CONCLUSION(S): Selective sharing of information for couples considering multifetal prgnancy reduction is a potentially useful strategy for moderating potentially stressful relationships in their social networks. Clinics should find a way of integrating the discussion of selective sharing into their clinic's cultural repertoire of patient-support services.

Communication↗