Page Section: Breadcrumbs
you are here:
Home
> Decisions & Case Notes > Case Notes > Radiologist did not obtain consent for registrar to observe ultrasound at teaching hospital (00HDC06794)
Page Section: Left Content Column
Page Section: Centre Content Column
Radiologist did not obtain consent for registrar to observe ultrasound at teaching hospital (00HDC06794)
Download Radiologist did not obtain consent for registrar to observe ultrasound at teaching hospital (00HDC06794) (PDF 12Kb)
(00HDC06794, 19 June 2001)
Radiologist ~ Registrar ~ Public
hospital ~ Observer ~ Training ~ Privacy ~ Rights 1(1), 4(2),
6(1)(d), 7(1), 9
A woman complained that when she attended a public teaching
hospital for a pelvic ultrasound, the radiologist authorised the
registrar to observe the ultrasound, but failed to explain why he
was present and obtain her consent. The radiologist had introduced
the registrar as her colleague, but it was later confirmed that he
was present for training purposes.
The radiologist was found in breach of Right 6(1)(d) in failing to
notify the patient of the proposed participation in teaching, and
in breach of Right 7(1) in failing to explain the reason for the
registrar's presence, which meant the patient was unable to make a
choice about whether she wished to participate in teaching. The
radiologist had incorrectly assumed that consent was required only
where a trainee was undertaking an interventional procedure. The
right to such an explanation extends to observational teaching. The
requirements apply regardless of whether the person being taught is
a medical student, house surgeon, registrar or consultant. If any
health professional or student attends a procedure to observe or
learn, this is a teaching situation.
The radiologist noted that this was a teaching hospital, and that
it is standard practice for registrars and house surgeons to
accompany senior medical staff on ward rounds and in outpatient
clinics throughout New Zealand. It was accepted that teaching of
trainee medical and nursing staff, and of staff who are already
registered health professionals, is essential to good quality
health care and ultimately benefits all health consumers. However,
the requirements of the Code are neither onerous nor unworkable,
and patients who receive a brief explanation about proposed
participation in teaching are unlikely to withhold their
consent.
In addition, the hospital's policy on informed consent made it
clear that patients have an express right to consent, or to decline
involvement in observational teaching. Observers (including
students) are defined as those additional to the normal medical and
nursing team immediately involved in the procedure, and staff
directly concerned with the ongoing care. Therefore the failure of
the radiologist to notify the patient regarding the proposed
observation, and obtain her consent, also breached the hospital's
policy, in breach of Right 4(2) of the Code.
The hospital was not vicariously liable for the radiologist's
breaches of the Code because it had in place an appropriate
policy.
Page Section: Right Content Column
Top of Page