Surgical consent practice in the UK following the Montgomery ruling: A national cross-sectional questionnaire study.

BACKGROUND

The Supreme Court case of Montgomery vs Lanarkshire Health Board in 2015 was a landmark case for consent practice in the UK which shifted focus from a traditional paternalistic model of consent towards a more patient-centered approach. Widely recognised as the most significant legal judgment on informed consent in the last 30 years, the case was predicted to have a major impact on the everyday practice of surgeons working in the UK National Health Service (NHS). Two years after the legal definition of informed consent was redefined, we carried out an audit of surgical consent practice across the UK to establish the impact of the Montgomery ruling on clinical practice.

MATERIALS &

METHODS

Data was collected by distribution of an electronic questionnaire to NHS doctors working in surgical specialities with a total of 550 respondents.

RESULTS

81% of surgical doctors were aware of the recent change in consent law, yet only 35% reported a noticeable change in the local consent process. Important barriers to modernisation included limited consent training, a lack of protected time for discussions with patients and minimal uptake of technology to aid decision-making/documentation.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of these findings, we identify a need to develop strategies to improve the consent process across the NHS and limit the predicted rise in litigation claims.