Giudici-Wach K, Gillois P, Remen T, Claudot F. Learning from informed consent litigation to improve practices: A systematic review.
PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2022;
105:1714-1721. [PMID:
34716051 DOI:
10.1016/j.pec.2021.10.009]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2021] [Revised: 10/05/2021] [Accepted: 10/06/2021] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
To describe the reasons that lead judges to qualify malpractice as a lack of information, then rule in favour or not of the health professional (HP).
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of case law relating to the breach of disclosure obligations over a ten-year period from 2010 to 2020. We used 3 legal databases: Légifrance, Dalloz and Lexis 360, all identified as the most exhaustive.
RESULTS
Of the 514 law cases included: judges found malpractice owing to lack of information in 377 (73.3%) cases. Among the latter, malpractices were lack of risk information (N = 257, 68.2%), lack of proof of information (N = 243, 64.5%) and/or lack of information on therapeutic alternatives (N = 49, 13.0%). These malpractices resulted in a conviction of the HP in 268 (71.1%) of the cases.
CONCLUSION
Case law is an important source of information for improving the quality of HP, lawyers, and judges' practices.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS
This review suggests that.
Collapse