Ethics and the law: Is there common ground on informed consent for disparities in hospital outcomes?

Nadine Housri, Mary Coombs, Babak J. Orandi, Timothy M. Pawlik, Leonidas Koniaris

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The association between procedure volume at institutions and outcomes of cancer surgeries has been widely published in the medical literature; discussed in the lay press; and, during the past 15 years, incorporated into quality improvement endeavors. In certain cases, institutional volume has become a proxy for quality. Despite the vast amount of retrospective data on this topic, physicians generally have been unsure how to approach the information and interpret it for their patients. Even more challenging to some physicians has been deciding whether the data oblige them to either direct patients with cancer to high-volume centers for care or discuss the data with these patients as part of informed consent. An additional challenge is that physicians must understand laws related to these issues and that these laws are unclear. This article reviews the ethical arguments for including disparities in hospital outcomes as part of informed consent and examines whether legal precedent can shed light on this debate.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)260-264
Number of pages5
JournalAnnals of Internal Medicine
Volume155
Issue number4
StatePublished - Aug 16 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Informed Consent
Ethics
Physicians
Ethical Review
Proxy
Quality Improvement
Neoplasms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine

Cite this

Ethics and the law : Is there common ground on informed consent for disparities in hospital outcomes? / Housri, Nadine; Coombs, Mary; Orandi, Babak J.; Pawlik, Timothy M.; Koniaris, Leonidas.

In: Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 155, No. 4, 16.08.2011, p. 260-264.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Housri, Nadine ; Coombs, Mary ; Orandi, Babak J. ; Pawlik, Timothy M. ; Koniaris, Leonidas. / Ethics and the law : Is there common ground on informed consent for disparities in hospital outcomes?. In: Annals of Internal Medicine. 2011 ; Vol. 155, No. 4. pp. 260-264.
@article{7f762cc1a4b34375badaa14309d9df4d,
title = "Ethics and the law: Is there common ground on informed consent for disparities in hospital outcomes?",
abstract = "The association between procedure volume at institutions and outcomes of cancer surgeries has been widely published in the medical literature; discussed in the lay press; and, during the past 15 years, incorporated into quality improvement endeavors. In certain cases, institutional volume has become a proxy for quality. Despite the vast amount of retrospective data on this topic, physicians generally have been unsure how to approach the information and interpret it for their patients. Even more challenging to some physicians has been deciding whether the data oblige them to either direct patients with cancer to high-volume centers for care or discuss the data with these patients as part of informed consent. An additional challenge is that physicians must understand laws related to these issues and that these laws are unclear. This article reviews the ethical arguments for including disparities in hospital outcomes as part of informed consent and examines whether legal precedent can shed light on this debate.",
author = "Nadine Housri and Mary Coombs and Orandi, {Babak J.} and Pawlik, {Timothy M.} and Leonidas Koniaris",
year = "2011",
month = "8",
day = "16",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "155",
pages = "260--264",
journal = "Annals of Internal Medicine",
issn = "0003-4819",
publisher = "American College of Physicians",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ethics and the law

T2 - Is there common ground on informed consent for disparities in hospital outcomes?

AU - Housri, Nadine

AU - Coombs, Mary

AU - Orandi, Babak J.

AU - Pawlik, Timothy M.

AU - Koniaris, Leonidas

PY - 2011/8/16

Y1 - 2011/8/16

N2 - The association between procedure volume at institutions and outcomes of cancer surgeries has been widely published in the medical literature; discussed in the lay press; and, during the past 15 years, incorporated into quality improvement endeavors. In certain cases, institutional volume has become a proxy for quality. Despite the vast amount of retrospective data on this topic, physicians generally have been unsure how to approach the information and interpret it for their patients. Even more challenging to some physicians has been deciding whether the data oblige them to either direct patients with cancer to high-volume centers for care or discuss the data with these patients as part of informed consent. An additional challenge is that physicians must understand laws related to these issues and that these laws are unclear. This article reviews the ethical arguments for including disparities in hospital outcomes as part of informed consent and examines whether legal precedent can shed light on this debate.

AB - The association between procedure volume at institutions and outcomes of cancer surgeries has been widely published in the medical literature; discussed in the lay press; and, during the past 15 years, incorporated into quality improvement endeavors. In certain cases, institutional volume has become a proxy for quality. Despite the vast amount of retrospective data on this topic, physicians generally have been unsure how to approach the information and interpret it for their patients. Even more challenging to some physicians has been deciding whether the data oblige them to either direct patients with cancer to high-volume centers for care or discuss the data with these patients as part of informed consent. An additional challenge is that physicians must understand laws related to these issues and that these laws are unclear. This article reviews the ethical arguments for including disparities in hospital outcomes as part of informed consent and examines whether legal precedent can shed light on this debate.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80051628075&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80051628075&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 21844552

AN - SCOPUS:80051628075

VL - 155

SP - 260

EP - 264

JO - Annals of Internal Medicine

JF - Annals of Internal Medicine

SN - 0003-4819

IS - 4

ER -