Consent for Treatment in the UK - 2017 Update

Abstract

Catering for all educational levels, ethnicities and ages with medical consent has always been difficult. There is a general consensus in the literature that there is a need for a review of treatment consent to ensure patient comprehension and satisfaction. In recent years, the medical profession has found an increase in the cost of litigation. Marino et al. [1] highlighted that in Italy Trauma and Orthopaedics is the “most sued” specialty and Kadakia et al. [2] showed that patients actually have very little understanding when questioned about their own trauma. The study found that less than half of the patients knew what bone they had fractured and less than 20% knew their recovery time. This suggests the need for a reform in how patients are given information to ensure higher comprehension and satisfaction in surgical procedures. The General Medical Council [3], in “Good Medical Practice” 2013, detailed that exchange of information is key to good decision making and so how are patients expected to make informed decisions when they do not know the information? A recent supreme court judgement has altered the legal landscape in the consent process in the UK. The outcome of the Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board legal battle has become a landmark Scottish case and has had a profound effect on the British legal system as the judgment disseminated from the highest British court.