Pennsylvania Supreme Court: Informed Consent Is a Non-delegable Duty

Blog

By Susan Boisvert, BSN, MHSA, CPHRM, FASHRM, Senior Risk Specialist
 
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued an opinion on June 20, 2017, in the case of Shinal v. Toms that is likely to significantly change the way physicians and surgeons address informed consent. As outlined in the opinion, the patient, Megan Shinal, was seen in consultation by Dr. Toms for a recurrent nonmalignant craniopharyngioma. Dr. Toms discussed the procedure as well as risks and benefits. It is not clear whether alternatives were clearly explained to Mrs. Shinal and whether she understood them. Subsequently, Mrs. Shinal met with a physician assistant who performed a history and physical. This physician assistant provided additional education related to the surgery and obtained Mrs. Shinal’s signed informed consent. Mrs. Shinal’s carotid artery was perforated during the surgery, and she suffered a brain injury resulting in partial blindness. The Shinals initiated a malpractice claim alleging, among other allegations, that Dr. Toms failed to “offer her the lower risk surgical alternative of subtotal resection of the benign tumor, followed by radiation.”1
 
Dr. Toms prevailed at trial and the case was appealed. The Superior Court upheld the trial court decision, ruling that the information provided to Mrs. Shinal by the physician assistant constituted part of the informed consent. The Shinals appealed to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which ruled that “the duty to obtain informed consent belongs solely to the physician and that it is non-delegable.”2 The court further stated:
 
…we hold that a physician cannot rely upon a subordinate to disclose the information
required to obtain informed consent. Without direct dialogue and a two-way
exchange between the physician and patient, the physician cannot be confident
the patient comprehends the risks, benefits, likelihood of success, and alternatives.3
 
According to the Pennsylvania Medical Care Availability and Reduction of Error (MCARE) Act, “consent is informed if the patient has been given a description of the procedure…and the risks and alternatives that a reasonably prudent patient would require to make an informed decision as to that procedure,”4 and the physician “owes a duty to a patient to obtain the informed consent of the patient or the patient’s authorized representative prior to…performing surgery, including the related administration of anesthesia.”5 The Supreme Court relied on the MCARE Act as well as case law to determine that informed consent is a non-delegable duty of the physician.
 
What Physicians Need to Know
The processes associated with obtaining informed consent are the treating physician’s responsibility and cannot be delegated. The following five suggestions will help physicians review their current approach to informed consent and revise it as necessary to comply with the ruling.
 

  1. Prepare ahead for the discussion.
    Review the patient’s records. Consider all treatment options, including doing nothing. Consider the risks and benefits of each approach and the likelihood of success. Using professional judgment, determine the pertinent high-frequency, low-harm risks as well as the low-frequency, high-harm risks for the treatment options and be prepared to address these with the patient during the discussion. When standardized consent forms are used, ensure that the form covers every option. Revise the form to add other considerations as necessary.
     
  2. Prepare the patient for the discussion.
    When possible, provide the patient with educational material related to the procedures under consideration. If the informed consent document is lengthy, provide the patient a copy ahead of time to facilitate review and development of questions. Depending on the scope and complexity of the planned intervention, more than one discussion may be necessary. The patient may need time to weigh the information and consider the alternatives, as well as get a second opinion if they desire.
     
  3. Have the discussion.
    Unless the situation is an emergency and/or the patient is an inpatient, hold the discussion in the office setting, which is likely more familiar and less threatening to the patient. Allow adequate time. The more complex the discussion, the longer the visit should be. Additional considerations may include the need for communication adjuncts, such as an interpreter or guardian, if the patient has low health literacy, is not competent, or is a child.
     
  4. Evaluate patient comprehension.  
    “Informed” means that the patient has been given adequate information to make a decision and that the patient understood the information. Evaluate patient comprehension using the “teach back” method, which simply involves asking the patient to explain the procedure in their own words. Address any misconceptions. Confirm the agreed-upon strategy with the patient and address any final questions. This is a good time to revise and/or personalize the consent form as necessary and have the patient sign and date it. The provider who obtained consent should be the provider who is performing the procedure, and the provider should sign and date the form after the patient has signed it. Follow the organization’s policy on whether a witness is required.
     
  5. Document the consent process.  
    Each step of the consent process must be documented in the patient’s medical record. Include the date and time each conversation occurred, a brief summary of what was discussed, any questions asked, and the answers provided. Document adjuncts used such as educational material, the use of interpreters, and the presence of family and/or additional staff members. Document an evaluation of patient’s comprehension of the informed consent discussion (for example, “The patient was able to correctly state/describe the intended procedure as well as the associated risks, benefits, and the anticipated outcome.”).
What Hospitals Need to Know 
Informed consent is discussed in three locations in the CMS Hospital Conditions of Participation:
  1. 42 CFR §482.13 Patient’s Rights, specifically 42 CFR §482.13(b)(2) [patient’s right to be informed]
  2. 42 CFR §482.24 Medical Record Services, specifically 42 CFR §482.24(c)(4)(v) [properly executed consent forms]
  3. 42 CFR §482.51 Surgical Services, specifically 42 CFR §482.51(b)(2) [properly executed informed consent form in patient’s chart before surgery, except in emergencies]
Although informed consent is the physician’s responsibility, hospitals still have a responsibility to “assure [sic] that the practitioner(s) responsible for the surgery obtain informed consent from patients in a manner consistent with the hospital’s policies governing the informed consent process.”6 Also, “If there are additional requirements under State law for informed consent, the hospital must comply with those requirements.”7 The Conditions of Participation also address pertinent elements of a “properly executed informed consent form,” a “well designed” informed consent form, and a “well designed informed consent process.”8
 
In the wake of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling, hospitals should consider:
  1. Initiating a multidisciplinary team to review the ruling in light of current informed consent practices to identify gaps.
  2. Revising informed consent policies and procedures to specify that obtaining consent is a non-delegable responsibility of the physician performing the procedure. 
  3. Providing education for physicians, advanced practice professionals, and clinical staff members to clarify the hospital’s approach to the ruling and associated changes to policies and procedures. 
  4. Monitoring the informed consent processes for compliance.
 
References
  1. Shinal v. Toms, 2017 WL 2655387 (Pa. June 20, 2017).
  2. Ibid. 
  3. Ibid.
  4. Medical Care Availability and Reduction of Error (MCARE) Act. Act of Mar. 20, 2002. P.L. 154. No. 13. §504(b).
  5. Ibid. §504(a)(1).
  6. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), State Operations Manual Appendix A - Survey Protocol, Regulations and Interpretive Guidelines for Hospitals, (Rev. 151, 11/20/1015).  
  7. Ibid. 
  8. Ibid.

 
COPYRIGHTED
 
No legal or medical advice intended. This post includes general risk management guidelines. Such materials are for informational purposes only. These informational materials are not intended and must not be taken as legal or medical advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances.
 
 
 


Related Resources:

How to Effectively Use Social Media as an Emergency Communication Tool

12/20/2018
Social media has changed the way people communicate. Is your emergency plan keeping up? Read More »

Telemedicine: Reducing the Risks

Article - 6/6/2017
An overview of the opportunities and risks of telemedicine for physicians and healthcare providers. Read More »

Tips to Reduce Communication-Related Errors in Healthcare

Blog - 5/15/2017
Communication failures in healthcare―particularly in large hospitals or medical centers―are often inadequately addressed. This article outlines five things you can do to reduce communication-related errors. Read More »

Patient Portals: Manage Risk & Protect Privacy

Article - 4/18/2017
Healthcare facilities and office practices that have successfully adopted patient portals have seen many benefits; however, there are also risks. This article provides recommendations to address and mitigate risks associated with patient portals. Read More »

​Caring for Gender-Expansive Youth

Article - 3/30/2017
Gender-expansive youth face many challenges in their lives. This article provides information to help healthcare providers do their best to ensure access to gender-affirming healthcare is not one of those challenges. Read More »

Caring for Transgender Patients

Article - 3/28/2017
Transgender individuals face many barriers when seeking healthcare. This article identifies common barriers and provides tips for healthcare providers to improve the care they provide to transgender patients. Read More »

Making Patient-Centered Decisions

Blog - 3/9/2017
Tips to help healthcare providers understand biases, increase engagement, and develop a patient-centered approach. Read More »

Celebrating Patient Safety Month With Patient and Family Advisory Council Video Series

Blog - 2/28/2017
Learn how Patient and Family Advisory Councils (PACFs) are changing lives and improving care. Read More »

Legal Concerns Regarding Medical Record Alteration

Article - 12/19/2016
An actual case study is used to illustrate how altering electronic medical records after the fact can damage the defensibility of a malpractice lawsuit. Read More »

Shared Decision-Making & Patient Engagement

Blog - 12/15/2016
An overview of why patient engagement and shared decision-making is essential to successful patient-centered care. Read More »

Seven Tips to Increase Patient Engagement

Blog - 12/15/2016
Tips to help physicians and healthcare providers improve care through patient engagement. Read More »

Language to Encourage Patient Engagement

Blog - 12/15/2016
Insight into how the language you use when communicating with patients can help or hinder patient engagement. Read More »

Medical Assistant Scope of Practice

Article - 12/5/2016
To help ensure medical assistants are used safely and effectively in your office or organization you must clearly define their scope of practice. This article provides tips on how to do so. Read More »

Pros and Cons of Dispensing Medication Samples

Article - 11/21/2016
Outlines the pros and cons of dispensing medication samples and steps you can take to help ensure patient safety. Read More »

Tips for Responding to Negative Online Reviews

Blog - 11/15/2016
Tips to help you develop and implement a response plan to negative online reviews. Read More »

Preventing Healthcare Worker Fatigue

Article - 11/7/2016
Extended work hours bring up concerns of worker fatigue and its effects on patient safety. Learn strategies to help prevent worker fatigue and mitigate risk. Read More »

A Guide to Purchasing MPL Insurance

Guidelines
This guide provides important information about medical professional liability insurance coverage and points to consider when selecting an insurance provider. Read More »

How to Recognize and Respond to Zika

Blog - 9/2/2016
Tips to help physicians and healthcare providers recognize and respond to the Zika virus. Read More »

Communicating With Patients About Zika

Blog - 9/2/2016
How and what to communicate to patients regarding the Zika virus. Read More »

Reducing Zika Risk for Healthcare Providers

Blog - 9/2/2016
Identify and reduce risks to physicians and healthcare workers who treat patients with the Zika virus. Read More »

Addressing Patient Non-Compliance

Article - 8/18/2016
This article evaluates an actual non-compliance case study to illustrate why patients fail to follow treatment plans and how physicians and healthcare providers can work to promote compliance, improve patient safety, and reduce malpractice risk. Read More »

Exploring the Benefits of Root-Cause Analysis of Medical Professional Liability Claims

Article - 8/18/2016
The analysis of medical professional liability (MPL) data can offer a unique lens into a number of perspectives that are important to physicians and health systems. Most notably, it can provide intelligence to make the delivery of healthcare safer and ultimately reduce malpractice exposure for physicians and hospitals. Read More »