Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Perioperative Complications Chapter: Shared Decision-Making and Informed Consent

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Catastrophic Perioperative Complications and Management

  • 974 Accesses

Abstract

The practice of anesthesiology has grown remarkably safer, but complications ranging from minor to catastrophic may still occur. Improvements in patient safety have made surgery and anesthesia both commonplace and routine. The perioperative process, which classically began with admission to the hospital the night before the day of surgery, has been condensed into the efficient and increasingly cost-effective process of outpatient surgery. Patient confidence and comfort with this process has much to do with openness and communication on behalf of anesthesiologists and surgeons which did not always exist.

Informed consent acknowledges the patient’s individual autonomy and right to decide what medical or surgical interventions should be a part of his or her health care. A patient may elect to pursue a certain treatment when he or she is determined to have decision-making capacity; risks, benefits, and alternatives to the proposed treatment have been adequately disclosed; and the decision to pursue treatment is voluntary, or free of external coercion.

Shared decision-making builds on the foundation of informed consent. It broadens the discussion to include the patient’s goals of care, beliefs, and expectations in context with the physician’s expert recommendation and experience. While perhaps most essential in high-risk operations and medically complex patients, shared decision-making is becoming increasingly recognized as a valuable tool for all patients in the perioperative process. Benefits of shared decision-making include increased patient satisfaction, cost savings, and decreased litigation.

Many institutions across the country have implemented multidisciplinary care teams to evaluate complex patients preoperatively, guide the decision-making process, plan for both postoperative care and unanticipated outcomes, and establish advanced directives. Informed consent and shared decision-making coupled with evidence-based medicine are an increasingly essential aspect of the patient-centered perioperative process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Ginsberg MD. Informed consent: no longer just what the doctor ordered – the contributions of medical associations and courts to a more patient friendly doctrine. Mich St U J Med L. 2010;15:17.. Retrieved from http://repository.jmls.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1046&context=facpubs.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Schloendorff v Society of New York Hosp, 105 NE 92 (NY 1914).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Salgo v Leland Stanford Jr. Univ. Bd. Trustees. 154 Cal. App. 2d 560, 317 P.2d 170 (1957).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Natanson v Kline, 186 Kan. 393, 411, 350 P. 2d 1093 (1960).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Canterbury v Spence, 464 F2d 772 (DC Cir 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cobbs v. Grant, 8 Cal. 3d 229, 502 P.2d 1, 104 Cal. Rptr. 505 (Cal. 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kissinger v. Lofgren, 836 F.2d 678 (CA 1 [Mass] 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Matthies v Mastromonoco, 733 A.2d 456 (N.J. 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ankuda CK, Block SD, Cooper Z, Correll DJ, Hepner DL, Lasic M, et al. Measuring critical deficits in shared decision making before elective surgery. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;94(3):328–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. American Society of Anesthesiologists syllabus on ethics 2016: introduction to informed consent. Park Ridge: American Society of Anesthesiologists; 1999. p. A-1. Retrieved from: https://www.asahq.org/~/media/sites/asahq/files/public/resources/asa%20committees/syllabus-on-ethics-2016.pdf?la=en.

  11. Bal BS, Choma TJ. What to disclose? Revisiting informed consent. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470(5):1346–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Johnson v Kokemoor, 545 NW2d 495, 495 (Wis 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Avila v Flangas, No. 04-95-00106-CV, 1996 WL 63036, at *1 (Tex App Feb 14, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Degennaro v Tandom, 873 A2d 191, 191 (Conn App Ct 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Zimmerman v New York City Health and Hospital Corp, 458 NYS2d 552 (NY App Div 1983).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Dingle v Belin, 749 A2d 157 (Md 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Henry v Bronx Lebanon Medical Center, 385 NYS2d 772 (NY App Ct 1976).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Moore v Regents of the University of California, 793 P2d 479 (Cal 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Shine v. Vega, 429 Mass. 456, 709 N.E.2d 58 (Mass. 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Caplan RA. Informed consent: patterns of liability from the ASA closed claims project. ASA Newsl. 2000;64(6):7–9.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Oneill O. Some limits of informed consent. J Med Ethics. 2003;29(1):4–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Grisso T, Appelbaum PS. Assessing competence to consent to treatment: a guide for physicians and other health professionals. New York: Oxford University Press; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Moye J, Marson DC. Assessment of decision making capacity in older adults: an emerging area of practice and research. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2007;62(1):P3–P11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Evans WG, Tulsky JA, Back AL, Arnold RM. Communication at times of transitions: how to help patients cope with loss and re-define hope. Cancer J. 2006;12(5):417–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Brush DR, Rasinski KA, Hall JB, Alexander GC. Recommendations to limit life support: a national survey of critical care physicians. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012;186(7):633–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. White DB, Malvar G, Karr J, Lo B, Curtis JR. Expanding the paradigm of the physician’s role in surrogate decision making: an empirically derived framework. Crit Care Med. 2010;38(3):743–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Buchanan AE, Brock DW. Deciding for others: the ethics of surrogate decision making. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Levinson W, Kao A, Kuby A, Thisted RA. Not all patients want to participate in decision making. A national study of public preferences. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(6):531–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Quill TE, Brody H. Physician recommendations and patient autonomy: finding a balance between physician power and patient choice. Ann Intern Med. 1996;125(9):763–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Joosten EA, DeFuentes-Merillas L, de Weert GH, Sensky T, van der Staak CP, de Jong CA. Systematic review of the effects of shared decision making on patient satisfaction, treatment adherence and health status. Psychother Psychosom. 2008;77(4):219–26.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Wolpe P. The triumph of autonomy in bioethics: a sociological view. In: Devries R, Subedi J, editors. Bioethics and society: sociological investigations of the enterprise of bioethics. Enblewood Cliff: Prentice Hall; 1998. p. 38–59.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Chewning B, Bylund C, Shah B, Arora NK, Gueguen JA, Makoul G. Patient preferences for shared decisions: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2012;86(1):9–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2011.02.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Oshima Lee E, Emanuel EJ. Shared decision making to improve care and reduce costs. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(1):6–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Montori VM, Gafni A, Charles C. A shared treatment decision-making approach between patients with chronic conditions and their clinicians: the case of diabetes. Health Expect. 2006;9(1):25–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Wilson SR, Strub P, Buist AS, Knowles SB, Lavori PW, Lapidus J, et al. Shared treatment decision making improves adherence and outcomes in poorly controlled asthma. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2010;181(6):566–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Chandrakantan A, Saunders T. Perioperative ethical issues. Anesthesiol Clin. 2016;34(1):35–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Cooper Z, Corso K, Bernacki R, Bader A, Gawande A, Block S. Conversations about treatment preferences before high-risk surgery: a pilot study in the preoperative testing center. J Palliat Med. 2014;17(6):701–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Nelson O, Quinn TD, Arriaga AF, Hepner DL, Lipsitz SR, Cooper Z, et al. A model for better leveraging the point of preoperative assessment: patients and providers look beyond operative indications when making decisions. A A Case Rep. 2016;6(8):241–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Arterburn D, Wellman R, Westbrook E. Introducing decision making aids at Group Health was linked to sharply lower hip and knee surgery rates and costs. Health Aff. 2012;31:2094–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. National Quality Forum. National standards for the certification of patient decision aids. Final report. 2016. PDF file available at https://www.qualityforum.org/Publications/2016/12/National_Standards_for_the_Certification_of_Patient_Decision_Aids.aspx

  41. Stacey D, Légaré F, Lewis K, Barry MJ, Bennett CL, Eden KB, Holmes-Rovner M, Llewellyn-Thomas H, Lyddiatt A, Thomson R, Trevena L.Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017; (4):CD001431.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Stacey D, Légaré F, Lewis KB. Patient decision aids to engage adults in treatment or screening decisions. JAMA. 2017;318(7):657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Spatz ES, Krumholz HM, Moulton BW. Prime time for shared decision making. JAMA. 2017;317(13):1309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anesthesiology, The University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Burlington, VT, USA

    William K. Hart & Mitchell H. Tsai

  2. Department of Anesthesiology, The University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    William K. Hart

  3. Department of Palliative Medicine, Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland, OR, USA

    Robert C. Macauley

  4. Department of Anesthesiology, The Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA

    Daniel A. Hansen

  5. Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, The University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Burlington, VT, USA

    Mitchell H. Tsai

Authors
  1. William K. Hart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert C. Macauley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniel A. Hansen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mitchell H. Tsai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mitchell H. Tsai .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anesthesiology, LSU Health Shreveport, Shreveport, LA, USA

    Charles J. Fox, III

  2. Department of Anesthesiology, LSU Health Shreveport, Shreveport, LA, USA

    Elyse M. Cornett

  3. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery/Head and Neck Surgery, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center – Shreveport, Shreveport, LA, USA

    G. E. Ghali

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hart, W.K., Macauley, R.C., Hansen, D.A., Tsai, M.H. (2019). Perioperative Complications Chapter: Shared Decision-Making and Informed Consent. In: Fox, III, C., Cornett, E., Ghali, G. (eds) Catastrophic Perioperative Complications and Management. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96125-5_29

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96125-5_29

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-96124-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-96125-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation