medigraphic.com

2010, Number 2

<< Back

Anales de Radiología México 2010; 9 (2)

Radiologic studies and informed consent: consequences of inadequate communication

Helmes HAK, Motta-Ramírez GA, Solís VMC

Language: Spanish
References: 18
Page: 97-103
PDF size: 212.81 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Health care personnel is forced to give information to the patients or family in what refers to their suffering, for what is very important to know how, when, what, to whom and how to communicate it. American College of Physicians (ACP) defines the informed consent (IC) as the explanation to an attentive and mentally competent patient of the nature of his illness.
The information and consent should go bound and at the same time. The documentation should reflect the doctor’s concern in offering the enough information so that the patient interprets it appropriately and his/her participation is achieved in the decisions making.


REFERENCES

  1. García-Urbon M. Consentimiento Informado en Radiología. MedSpain, Hospital General Río Carrión 1998:1-8. http://www.medspain.com/ant/n2_dic98/consentí.htm

  2. Alfaro-Ramos L y Magaña-Izquierdo M. Realidades conceptuales del consentimiento informado para la seguridad del médico y del paciente. Rev Inst Nal Enf Resp Mex 2008;21: 213-220.

  3. Garza-Garza R y Arredondo-Galan JH. El consentimiento con información (Primera y Segunda partes). Rev Mex Radiol 1999;53:81-87.

  4. Exposición a la radiación. Diagnóstico por Imágenes, Parte B, Libro 1. American College of Physicians 1998:439-445.

  5. Cameron JR. Link between diagnostic X-rays and cancer uncertain. Evidencebased Healthcare 2004;8:205-206.

  6. Robb M. Like one hundred X-rays? Study suggests many referring physicians don´t grasp or explain to patients the radiation exposure involved with CT. Radiology Today Magazine 2004:1-6.

  7. Chen MM, Coakley FV, Kaimal A y Laros RK. Guidelines for CT and MRI use during pregnancy and lactation. Obstet Gynecol 2008;112:333-340.

  8. Hilton SVW. Capitulo 17. Efectos de protección de la radiación en niños. En: Hilton SVW, Radiología Pediátrica, primera edición, México: Manual Moderno 1987: 540-574.

  9. López-Correa E y Arenas-Ornelas G. Algunos hechos clínicos para fundamentar el diagnóstico de migraña en los niños. Rev Mex Pediatr 2007;74: 277-280.

  10. Brenner JD. Estimated risks of radiationinduced fatal cancer from pediatric CT. AJR 2001;176:289-296.

  11. Appropiateness criteria: Headache. ACR 2003:487-493.

  12. Lewis DW, Ashwal S, Dahl G, Dorbad D, Hirtz D, Prensky A y Jarjour I. Evaluation of children and adolescents with recurrent headaches. Neurology 2002;59;490-498.

  13. Pedrosa-Sanchéz C. Diagnóstico por imagen, Tratado de Radiología Clínica, tercera edición, Madrid Interamericana Mc Graw Hill, 1987; Vol. II:1745-1746.

  14. Guías de Práctica Clínica para la solicitud de estudios de diagnóstico por imagen en Pediatría. BSCP Can Ped 2002;26:2-3.

  15. Cochran ST, Bomyea K y Sayre JW: Trends in adverse events after IV administration or contrast media. AJR 1990;175:621-628.

  16. ACR Committee on Drugs and Contrast Media Manual on Contrast Media. ACR 2008;6:2-98.

  17. Lasser EC. Pretreatment with corticosteroids to prevent reactions to contrast material: overview and implication. AJR 1998;150: 257-259.

  18. Bettmann MA y Spring DB. Legal considerations with contrast agent use. Seminars Intervent Radiol 2001;18(4):431-436.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com