Back to Research

Legal Implications of Informed Consent in Spine Surgery

OLLIF as a Viable Alternative

Medical Ethics ResearchLegal AnalysisOngoing Research

Overview

This presentation explores the intersection of legal obligations under informed consent and the clinical context of Oblique Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLLIF).

We will examine whether failing to include OLLIF in discussions with eligible patients constitutes a breach of the informed consent standard, analyzing the legal and ethical implications for medical practitioners.

Research Proposal Overview

Introduction

Explore the doctrine of informed consent in relation to OLLIF, a minimally invasive spine surgery technique.

Legal Analysis

Examine the legal obligations for disclosing alternative treatments like OLLIF.

Clinical Context

Investigate OLLIF's benefits and its current exclusion from many informed consent discussions.

Ethical Considerations

Assess the ethical implications of omitting OLLIF as a treatment option.

Research Objectives

Analyze Legal Doctrine

Examine informed consent application to alternative treatments like OLLIF

Investigate OLLIF Viability

Determine if OLLIF qualifies as a viable alternative under legal standards

Assess Legal Consequences

Evaluate potential risks for physicians who omit OLLIF from discussions

Key Research Questions

Legal Requirements

What are the legal standards for informed consent regarding alternative treatments, and how do they specifically apply to OLLIF?

Ethical Standards

Does the exclusion of OLLIF from informed consent discussions in eligible cases violate established legal or ethical standards?

Liability Risks

What potential liability risks do physicians face if they fail to disclose OLLIF as a viable treatment option to eligible patients?

Research Methodology

Case Law Analysis

Review key rulings such as Canterbury v. Spence and Minnesota-specific cases to define the scope of alternative treatment disclosure.

Statutory Review

Examine Minnesota's Health Care Bill of Rights and its implications for informed consent obligations.

Comparative Analysis

Assess OLLIF's inclusion under the "reasonable patient standard" and compare it to other innovative treatments.

Expected Outcomes

Legal Definition

Determine whether OLLIF meets the criteria of a viable alternative under the doctrine of informed consent, providing clarity for medical professionals.

Physician Obligations

Identify and outline the specific legal obligations of physicians to include OLLIF in informed consent discussions with eligible patients.

Risk Assessment

Outline potential liability risks for omitting OLLIF as an option, providing a clear legal framework for compliance and risk management in medical practice.

Significance and Implications

Bridge Knowledge Gap

This study will connect innovative medical practices with legal standards, ensuring physicians understand their obligations when new procedures like OLLIF emerge.

Patient Empowerment

By focusing on informed consent, this research will advocate for greater transparency in treatment discussions, empowering patients to make fully informed decisions about their care.

Legal and Medical Impact

The findings will have implications for both legal and medical communities, promoting alignment between clinical practice and legal standards in patient care.

Additional Resources