Article Text

PDF
Paper
Should blood-borne virus testing be part of operative consent? When the doctor becomes the patient
  1. Simon T Adams,
  2. Stephen H Leveson
  1. Department of General Surgery, York Hospital, York, UK
  1. Correspondence to Simon Adams, Department of General Surgery, York Hospital, Wigginton Road, York, YO31 8HE, UK; rpbgt{at}hotmail.com

Abstract

Point-of-care testing (POCT) is a sensitive, specific and rapid form of testing for the presence of HIV antibodies. Post-exposure prophylaxis for HIV infection can reduce seroconversion rates by up to 80%. Needlestick injuries are the second commonest cause of occupational injury in the NHS and 20% of these occur during operations. In the NHS, in order to protect staff and patients from the risk of bloodborne viruses such as HIV, it is mandatory to report such injuries; however, numerous studies have shown that many groups, particularly doctors, are reluctant to do so. This article outlines the arguments for and against the introduction of preoperatively seeking consent from patients to have their blood tested for HIV via POCT in order to improve the reporting rates of needlestick injuries incurred during surgery and to protect staff from infection.

  • Consent
  • general
  • HIV infection and AIDS
  • informed consent
  • needlestick
  • operative
  • testing

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Competing interests None.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.