These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Violation of patient education responsibility. Implications and outlook].
    Author: Giebel GD, Troidl H.
    Journal: Langenbecks Arch Chir; 1997; 382(2):111-5. PubMed ID: 9198704.
    Abstract:
    In both jurisdiction and medical science, given conditions require appropriate intervention, which may in turn result in norms being created. Norms, however, counteract individuality. An essential prerequisite for free decision--making is an absolute awareness of all possibilities available. Therefore the physician/surgeon too, is obliged to impart all relevant information to the patient prior to an operation to enable the patient to reach a decision, either to agree to or refuse the operation. This process of information transfer may sometimes fail on one or both sides. Treatment errors are usually classified according to scientific medical practice. In the case of "breach to duty in information patient" the final decision is the judges. As judicial decisions are not foreseeable, the communication between patient and surgeon thus becomes standardized and doctors tend to become defensive, resulting in the information becoming even more extensive covering all possible situations. There is no guarantee of success in surgery. Selective perception on the part of the patient is unavoidable and confidence in the relationship between patient and surgeon is beneficial to the patient's rehabilitation. Therefore, we should strive to decriminalize the preoperative talk held between surgeon and patient.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]