By Cheryl Clark
March 12, 2015
The healthcare system only gives “lip service” to the informed consent routine, says cardiologist Harlan Krumholz, MD, SM. “What if patient-centered informed consent actually meant something?” he asked clinicians and patient advocates attending a Lown Instituteconference in San Diego this week.
“There’s a structural moment in time when people sign something that says yes, [the doctor] can proceed [with the treatment]… But it’s a complete sham. It’s a complete sham.”Krumholz, director of the Center for Outcome Research and Evaluation at Yale University School of Medicine, wants to know what would happen if the consent process included a period of time when a patient could consider all of the risks and benefits of a treatment whether they would be appropriate, and whether there were alternatives with lower risks but similar outcomes.
To read the full article, click here.