scholarly journals Patient Rights: Awareness and Practice in a Tertiary Care Indian Hospital

2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-30
Author(s):  
Alphonsa B Fernandes ◽  
Sweta D'Cunha ◽  
Sucharita Suresh
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Access To Healthcare ◽  
Patient Rights ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Lower Percentage ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
Choice Of Care

ABSTRACT Aim and objectives To study the awareness and practice of Patient rights and to compare the same between general and private ward hospitalized patients of a selected hospital. Materials and methods Descriptive research approach was adopted wherein data was collected from 120 hospitalized patients, i.e. 60 from general and 60 from private ward using a structured questionnaire. It was then analyzed by frequency, percentage and significance test to interpret the awareness and practice of patient rights in the hospital. Results The study reveals that awareness of patient rights was high in most of the cases. There was 71% awareness about the right to confidentiality, 67% awareness of the right to grievance redressal, 65% awareness about the right to be informed, 58% awareness of the right of access to healthcare and 55% awareness about the patient's right to choice of care and decision making. But low (39%) awareness was noted in case of patient's right to informed consent. With regards to practice of patient rights, it was seen that certain rights were well-practiced like 95% practice of the right of access to healthcare, 89% practice of the right to confidentiality and 64% practice of the right to choice of care and decision making. But relatively lower percentage of practice was observed for right to be informed (49%), right to informed consent (44%) and the right to grievance redressal (21%). There was significant difference in the level of awareness and practice of patient rights among private and general ward patients in most of the rights. Conclusion The study was vital in finding that most respondents were aware of patient rights. So also, most of the patient rights were practiced in the hospital in varying degrees, while a few needed immediate rectification and management action. How to cite this article Fernandes AB, D'Cunha S, Suresh S. Patient Rights: Awareness and Practice in a Tertiary Care Indian Hospital. Int J Res Foundation Hosp Healthc Adm 2014;2(1):25-30.

The Right of Access under EU Data Protection Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 104-128
Author(s):  
Helena U. Vrabec
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Shared Data ◽  
The Core ◽  
Data Protection Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Automated Decision Making ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
Data Subject ◽  
Core Part

Chapter 5 focuses on Article 15 of the GDPR and explains the scope of the information that can be accessed under the right. The chapter then discusses the importance of the interface to submit data subject access requests. The core part of Chapter 5 is the analysis of the regulatory boundaries of the right of access and various avenues to limit the right, for instance, a conflict with the rights of another individual. Finally, the chapter illustrates how the right of access is applied in the data-driven economy by applying it to three different contexts: shared data, anonymised/pseudonymised data, and automated decision-making.

scholarly journals Judicial Enforcement of Environmental Democracy: a Critical Analysis of Case Law on Access to Environmental Information in the European Union

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-43
Author(s):  
Marjan Peeters
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Environmental Information ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
Environmental Democracy ◽  
Gain Access ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Since the 1970s, the concept of environmental democracy, including the right to gain access to environmental information, has emerged as an important concept to promote and ensure public engagement in governmental environmental decision-making. While it is, generally, understood that environmental procedural rights deserve protection across the globe, it remains to be identified to what extent, in practice, the application of such rights differs across jurisdictions. Such differences may be caused by specific understandings of democracy and institutional characteristics. In light of this, this article analyses the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) regarding the right of access to environmental information. It observes that the EU legislature has implemented the right of access to environmental information more ambitiously than required under the Aarhus Convention, particularly with regard to legislative information. Moreover, the CJEU has steered EU institutions, including the European Commission, towards even greater transparency. The judicial reasoning by the CJEU is principled and refers to general values regarding openness and transparency codified in primary EU law and in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. These judicial developments also highlight the importance of promoting discourse on the implications of a rigorous approach to the right of access to environmental information, including the question of whether enabling wider public engagement necessarily leads to better decision-making. Finally, the article promotes the need for comparative research on how the right to gain access to environmental information is developing across the world.

scholarly journals Awareness of the Importance of and Adherence to Patients’ Rights Among Physicians and Nurses in Oman: An analytical cross-sectional study across different levels of healthcare

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 201
Author(s):  
Aisha N. Al-Saadi ◽  
Salah B. A. Slimane ◽  
Rawya A. Al-Shibli ◽  
Fatema Y. Al-Jabri
Keyword(s):  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Patient Rights ◽  
Care Staff ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Patients Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
Self Administered Questionnaire ◽  
Primary Care Staff

Objectives: This study aimed to determine the extent to which physicians and nurses in Oman were aware of the importance of and adhere to patients’ rights and whether this differed according to role, nationality, position and institutional healthcare level. Methods: This analytical cross-sectional study was carried out between December 2015 and March 2016 at various governmental healthcare institutions in Oman. A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to 1,385 practitioners at all healthcare levels. Results: A total of 1,213 healthcare practitioners (response rate: 87.58%) completed the survey, of which 685 (56.47%) were nurses and 528 (43.53%) were physicians. Overall, awareness of the importance of patients’ rights was high (91.51%), although adherence to these rights in practice was low (63.81%). The right of the patient to be informed was considered least important and was least adhered to (81.2% and 56.39%). Nationality, role and institutional level were significantly associated with awareness (P = 0.002, 0.024 and 0.034, respectively). Non-Omani staff were significantly more likely than Omani staff to be aware of (odds ratio [OR] = 1.696; P = 0.032) and adhere to (OR = 2.769; P <0.001) patient rights. Furthermore, tertiary care staff were twice as likely as primary care staff to perceive the importance of patient rights (OR = 2.076; P = 0.019). While physicians were more likely than nurses to be aware of the importance of patient rights, this difference was not significant (OR = 1.516; P = 0.126). Conclusion: These findings may help inform measures to enhance awareness of and adherence to patients’ rights in Oman.Keywords: Medical Ethics; Patient Rights; Awareness; Adherence; Physicians; Nurses; Oman.

Exceptions to the Legal Requirements: Emergency, Waiver, Therapeutic Privilege, and Compulsory Treatment

2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica W. Berg ◽  
Paul S. Appelbaum ◽  
Charles W. Lidz ◽  
Lisa S. Parker
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Consent To Treatment ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Consent Requirement ◽  
The Right ◽  
Therapeutic Privilege

In the preceding chapter we spoke of the requirement for informed consent in absolute terms, as something that was an invariable component of medical decision making. Over the years, courts have come to recognize that there are a number of situations in which physicians are permitted to render treatment without patients’ informed consent. Even under the earlier simple consent requirement, consent to treatment was not required in all situations. There are different kinds of situations in which requiring disclosure and obtaining consent could be detrimental to the patient, such as in an emergency or when the disclosure itself would harm the patient, and therefore in these situations informed consent is not required. Patients may also waive, or give up, the right to be informed and/or to consent. Here the concern is not with promoting health values but with promoting autonomy. Informed consent may also be dispensed with in a fourth set of cases, those of legally required treatment, in which the harm from requiring informed consent is not necessarily to the patient (or the patient alone) but to other important societal interests (e.g., civil commitment of the dangerous mentally ill—see Chapter 11—or forced treatment of patients with infectious disease). In addition, informed consent requirements are modified when a patient is incompetent (see Chapter 5). Each of these exceptions contains the potential for undermining the values sought to be implemented by the informed consent doctrine: self-determination and informed decision making. Exceptions that are too broadly defined and applied are a threat to these values. On the other hand, these exceptions are an important vehicle for the interjection into the decisionmaking process of another set of values, society’s interest in promoting the health of individuals. When judiciously defined and applied, the exceptions accord health-related values their due. However, the exceptions can be, and sometimes have been, defined so broadly as to dilute, if not dissolve, the fundamental duties imposed by the doctrine and to undermine its essential purpose of assuring patient participation in medical decision making (1).

scholarly journals Study of Obtaining Informed Consent in Pediatric Wards from the Viewpoint of Physicians and Children’s Parents

2021 ◽  
Vol In Press (In Press) ◽  
Author(s):  
Soodabeh Rezvani ◽  
Mohsen Fadavi ◽  
Shabnam Bazmi
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
Test Method ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Medical Team ◽  
Therapeutic Procedures ◽  
Right Relationship ◽  
Correct Communication ◽  
The One ◽  
The Right

Background: Obtaining informed consent for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures is of great moral and legal importance, which is more important in the field of pediatrics due to its specific issues. Objectives: Obtaining informed consent in the pediatric field is specific because of many factors, including the age of the patients and the necessity of obtaining consent from parents or legal guardians. This study aimed to evaluate the process of obtaining informed consent from the viewpoint of substitute decision-makers (parents or guardians) and physicians. Attention to the differences between the views of these two groups by establishing appropriate and correct communication skills between them can lead to greater satisfaction and increased effectiveness of treatments. Methods: In this descriptive study, the data were collected through questionnaires completed by 188 parents and 23 physicians. Finally, the statistical analysis was conducted using the one-sample t test method in SPSS 16. Results: In 96.3% of the cases, parents believed that where the patient, their relatives, and the medical team disagreed about the kind of treatment, the final decision was made by the medical team. One-third of them did not receive enough information or received no information at all. Informing parents about other possible treatments, complications of the procedures, considering the patients and their relatives’ opinions for the final decision, informing the child about his/her disease and treatment plans, and informing the parents about the possible outcomes were not in the favorable range. Physicians believed that decision about the treatment was made based on the opinion of the parents and the clinical committee, and only in 3.4% of the cases, their opinion was the basis for decision-making. Conclusions: The results showed that there was a gap between the parents and physicians’ opinions about informed consent, as the physicians believed that they act as the patients’ parents wish and the parents believed that their opinion played no important role in the final decision regarding the health of their children. Thus, it seems necessary to institutionalize the culture of participatory decision-making by physicians and parents in decisions related to the diagnosis and treatment of children, and more emphasis should be placed on establishing the right relationship between treatment staff and patients and their relatives.

scholarly journals The Impact of Pet Care Needs on Medical Decision-Making among Hospitalized Patients: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Patient Experience

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 237437352110460
Author(s):  
Carri S. Polick ◽  
Jennifer W. Applebaum ◽  
Caitlin Hanna ◽  
Darnysus Jackson ◽  
Sophia Tsaras-Schumacher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Care Center ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Care Needs ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
The Impact

Hospital-based protocols to support pet care needs for hospitalized patients may have potential to benefit patient health and wellbeing, but must be informed by experiences of hospitalized pet owners. The aim of this study was to determine the scope and need for pet care services among hospitalized patients. A panel of prior inpatients and their family members at a tertiary care center were surveyed about preferences, experiences, and need for assistance with pet care during hospitalization. Respondents (n = 113) expressed interest in a low/no-cost pet-boarding or foster program for adult patients struggling to find pet care assistance. The majority of respondents (n = 71; 63%) reported challenges securing pet care during a prior hospitalization, and/or knew someone who encountered similar challenges. Respondents also indicated that these challenges had a negative impact on health, recovery, or their own decision to receive medical care. Pet care challenges during hospitalization are likely common and have the potential to hamper medical decision-making and health outcomes of inpatients.

scholarly journals Female Patients and Informed Consent: Oman’s cultural background

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amal A. Al Balushi
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
Medical Ethics ◽  
Clinical Competence ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Cultural Background ◽  
Medical Professional ◽  
Patient Rights ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
Female Patients

Female patients in Oman face a certain amount of pressure from their families when making high-stakes decisions regarding personal healthcare. In fact, some women waive their right to make decisions, typically giving that responsibility to their husbands or fathers. This article highlights the need to empower females in decision-making when it comes to their own well-being. Moreover, informed consent should not be signed by anyone but the patient herself if the patient is deemed competent by a medical professional. Keywords: Informed Consent; Female; Decision Making; Clinical Competence; Medical Ethics; Patient Rights; Oman.

An Agenda for the Future

2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica W. Berg ◽  
Paul S. Appelbaum ◽  
Charles W. Lidz ◽  
Lisa S. Parker
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
Medical Care ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Medical Setting ◽  
Clear Understanding ◽  
Doctor Patient Communication ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right

The cornerstone of our approach to informed consent is the belief that the right of patients to authorize their own medical treatment, usually called the right to autonomy in decision making, is a moral value worth promoting. When medical care is required, patients should be met by physicians’ openness and willingness to present and discuss a variety of options, with the clear understanding that patients can play a role, if they desire, in shaping the ultimate decision. Our instinctive assumption that most patients would endorse this approach was confirmed by a large-scale study sponsored by the President’s Commission (1). Patients do want to know about and have the option of influencing the nature of their medical care, even if they may not always exercise that option (2). Our society’s deepseated traditions of respect for the integrity of the individual reinforce the importance of protecting patients’ interests in the medical decisionmaking process. Legal initiatives by themselves are insufficient to accomplish these results (see Chapter 7). Endless proposals to refine the legal mechanisms by which the doctrine of informed consent is enforced are not likely to achieve their goals. The legal rules governing informed consent operate at a level of generality that makes it difficult for physicians to take them into account in dealing with patients. Some surveys have found that physicians are completely ignorant of the operative standard for disclosure in their state (1), and others have found that even when physicians are aware of the standard, they do not apply it properly (3). More significantly, however, the medical setting seems relatively impervious to regulation in this area. Physicians and administrators have control over the structure of medical care and over the content of physician-patient interactions. Regardless of the law of informed consent, if the structure of hospital and office practice provides negligible opportunities for doctor-patient communication, little disclosure or shared decision making will occur. If physicians are resistant to the moral imperatives of informed consent, tinkering with standards of disclosure is unlikely to affect their behavior.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document