Geographic Variation in Informed Consent Law: Two Standards for Disclosure of Treatment Risks
Posted: 20 Nov 2007 Last revised: 26 Dec 2014
Abstract
We analyzed 714 jury verdicts in informed consent cases tried in 25 US states in 1985-2002 to determine whether the applicable standard of care ("patient" versus "professional" standard) affected the outcome. Verdicts for plaintiffs were significantly more frequent in states with a patient standard than in states with a professional standard (27% vs 17%, P=0.02). This difference in outcomes did not hold for other types of medical malpractice litigation (36% vs 37%, P=0.8). The multivariate odds of a plaintiff's verdict were more than twice as high in states with a patient standard than in states with a professional standard (Odds Ratio=2.15, 95% Confidence Interval=1.32-3.50). The law's expectations of clinicians with respect to risk disclosure appear to vary geographically.
Keywords: informed consent, treatment risk, disclosure
JEL Classification: K13, K32
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation