Article Text
Abstract
Patients need to be given the relevant information to be able to give informed consent, which might require the disclosure of a provisional diagnosis. Yet, there is no duty to give information to a patient if that patient is aware that this information exists but chooses not to request it. Diagnostic radiographers and healthcare scientists are often responsible for ensuring that patients have given informed consent for the investigations they undertake, but which were requested by other clinicians. Here we examine if they have a duty to disclose a patient’s provisional diagnosis made by a referring clinician if the patient asks for this information as part of the informed consent process to a diagnostic investigation. We first consider aspects of UK law, professional guidance and salient ethical principles, emphasising that while professional codes of practice highlight the need to act in the patient’s best interest, they do not require giving patients information they do not require for the examination or have not requested. We then propose that diagnostic radiographers and healthcare scientists placed in such a position use a ‘minimally necessary disclosure’ framework. This framework fulfils their commitment to their patient and the principle of veracity, while respecting the boundaries of their professional duties. The framework ensures that enough detail is given to the patient for them to be able to give informed consent, while shouldering the diagnostic professional from making a full disclosure, which is the duty of the referring clinician.
- Informed Consent
- Truth Disclosure
- Radiation
Data availability statement
Data sharing is not applicable as no data sets were generated and/or analysed for this study. No data are available.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
Data sharing is not applicable as no data sets were generated and/or analysed for this study. No data are available.
Footnotes
X @Michal_Pruski, @philosowhal
Contributors MP conceived the idea, and scoped the project with DR and JEH. All authors contributed to the writing and revising of the manuscript. MP assumes the overall responsibility as guarantor for the content of this manuscript.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.