patient videos - page 4
i was reading some of the remarks from 2010 post concerning patient modesty in conjunction with surgical procedure. one poster stated that, in her hospital, they tape their trauma surgeries, and... Read More
0Mar 17, '13 by LadyFree28, BSN, RNQuote from debst^debst, for your sisters' hysterectomy, were there photos "images" of the surgery? Usually every procedure has photos of intraoperation so that whatever is dictated was evidenced. It is part of the medical record. That may have not been used for educational purposes, FYI.I'm not a nurse, but can I give a patient's perspective on this? This a HUGE issue for a lot of patients, and the patient's wishes are NOT always respected.
Recently my sister had a hysterectomy at a large, well-respected hospital. On the consent there was a section asking for her permission to video and/or photograph her procedure for training, educational, and research purposes. Not only did she not sign giving permission, she wrote in the space in large block letters "ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!"
When she went to her post-op appointment, her gyn pulled out a video and photos and said, "here let me show you the procedure." She was mortified, furious, embarassed, and distraught.
When you are anesthetizing or sedating a patient, you are asking them to trust you, a complete stranger, to do exactly what you said. Nothing more. Nothing less. When something like this happens you are teaching them that they cannot trust you. I don't think this was done maliciously, but it was still a violation of trust.
I have had a similar experience with the staff at another hospital. I had in my admission papers, on my consent, and told each person that I came in contact with that they were NOT to release ANY information about me to ANYONE. Yet they ignored my request more than once and released PHI to family and friends. Again I don't think it was malicious, but it caused me some problems.
I just think medical staff don't look at the consent forms. They seem to just assume that everyone agrees to everything on the consent and that everyone is fine with family and friends being told about their condition and treatment. Since you do this job day in and day out, you become desensitized to it. You aren't bothered about dicussing intimate medical details and think nothing about a naked body and sometimes you forget that the non-medical person is not as open as you are.
I am sure that not every nurse and doctor is like this, but all it takes is for one person to not respect a patient's wishes to cause problems for every medical provider who deals with that patient after that.
As far as PHI, that certainly was a miscommunication that shouldn't have occurred. Most are careful about giving out information, and most of the time, unless the person is under an alias or on a list posted in the chart or at the nurses station, we don't release information. It they have no restrictions, we relay the call to the pt's room. People can be fined for exposing PHI. I'm not sure what your PHI was, ie procedure information, treatments, diagnoses, PMH, then that is a violation.
- Click Here To Get More Topics Like This! Get the hottest topics and toons in your inbox.
0Mar 17, '13 by J.R.theR.N2bi have no experience with the medical ethics which govern teaching hospitals, but from previous posters it seems that practically all procedures are taped to some degree. this is fine with me. as i have said many times before it is not the videotaping and still photography that causes me concern. it is the method of how patients are informed. to me, an aside on the entire consent form stating the possibility is NOT sufficient. judging from previous posters "possibility" of your procedure being taped is a misnomer, as it seems most, if not all, WILL be taped. if this is the case i feel even more strongly that patients should (must) be told upfront of this fact. i had concerns that hospitals added the taping possibility as an aside on the original consent form in hopes that patients would not notice or simply not read the entire form. comments fron some posters had convinced me this was far from the truth. patient privacy is very dear and important to me and should be upheld at all costs, even in cases when the medical science has much to gain. however, an even bigger issue is that of trust. in order for the healing process to work, patients MUST be able to trust their doctors and nurses and doctors and nurses MUST be able to trust their patients. when either side abuses that trust the relationship begins to rot and decay. i once said on this thread that i would never sue the doctor or the hospital if i discovered my procedure was taped unbeknownst to me simply because i failed to read the entire consent form. this is still completely true, however, as happened to a previous poster, after reading the whole form and coming to the point stating the possibility of videotaping the procedure, took a pen, scratched through the language on the form, and wrote ABSOLUTELY NOT in large letters, and the procedure was taped anyway, changes my thinking. this is an extremely grave breach of trust in which a hospital imposes their will over the expressed wishes of th patience. the absolute least i would expect in this case is a sincere face to face apology from both hospital and doctor and an offer to destroy any and all copies of the tapes and still pictures, but i still am not sure this would be sufficient. if i could not trust them to not tape the procedure when i expressly withheld consent, there is no more trust. in previous posts on this thread i have been directly told that possibility of being videotaped is clearly laid out in the consent form, and if my procedure was taped because i failed to read the entire consent form that i must live with the consequences. if the hospital and surgeon taped my procedure anyway after i withheld consent because THEY did not read the whole form, as stated by another poster, then THEY TOO should have to live with the consequences. i think, in the final analysis, all must agree that mistakes are made on both sides and we must, we MUST develop better ways of insuring that patients are more directly informed of hospital policies, and insuring that physicians have DIRECT knowledge of any parts of the procedure about to commence expressly not consented to by the patient. this is a lawsuit damaging to hospitals and patients alike that does not have to happen.
2Mar 17, '13 by PoochiewoochieQuote from J.R.theR.N2bI saw my name in there but due to the fact it's one big paragraph I didn't read your post. Post that are one huge paragraph give me a headache when I read them.my one and only hospitalization was in february of 1995. i was admitted for a cardiac catheterization and was told i would stay overnight and be discharged the next day. after arriving at the appointed time of six am i was prepped and awaiting the procedure by seven am. a patient of the cardiologist scheduled to do the caths that day had a patient have a heart attack earlier that morning, and it was after three in the afternoon before they could take me back for the procedure. i was asked if i wished to reschedule but since i was already registered and my iv was already in i decided to wait. the doc discovered blockages in three coronary arteries, and decided not to attempt angioplasty. my physician left for the night without informing me of what he had found. i was okay with this since i was told i would be spending the night afterward. later that night two nurses came to my room with orders i was to be transferred to the open heart unit. now i was scared, so scared that i refused to cooperate or go anywhere until i was informed just what was happening. my cardiologist was summoned back to the hospital, and after informing me of the blockages, bypass surgery was recommended, and i signed the consent without even looking through it. so on the present. for weeping angel i have absolutely no concern that patients are not being treated with dignity and respect, and for poochiewoochie, i have no interest in suing anyone. i would just like some good and solid reasons why the surgeon cannot inform the patient of the possibility that their procedure may be videotaped when they obtain the original informed consent form? i have nothing against procedures being taped, have no worries that patients would not be treated with dignity and respect, even though i might discover a procedure of mine were taped without my knowledge due to my failure to fully read entire consent form, i would still not sue anyone. i was unaware that procedure and surgical consent forms were only two or so pages in length, so there isn't any real reason not to read the entire thing,
I will say this-I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill, no offense. I seriously doubt that doctors are trying to put one over on their patients. Like I and others' have said in this thread, if you are competent then it's up to you to advocate for yourself which means reading any consent forms when you are having a procedure regardless of how long they are. And that is the problem I am reading from you-the consents are too long so why should you have to read through all it.Last edit by Poochiewoochie on Mar 17, '13
0Mar 17, '13 by PoochiewoochieHere's the consent form the hospital that I had my surgeries uses. As you can see, OP, it is very short and to the point. I have a feeling it is what most hospitals have and seriously can not see the problem with someone reading the whole thing.
0Mar 18, '13 by J.R.theR.N2bthank you for including a copy of the consent form used at thr hospital where your surgeries were done. it is certainly short, concise, and very easily understood. my feeling is now that adding the taping possibility to the consent form is sufficient. i was under the impression that the consent forms were a lot longer and more drawn out, and for this i apologize. i have never harbored any fears that doctors or hospitals were using these tapes for anything other than training or educational purposes, and certainly not to take advantage of patients. it is just that the issue of patient privacy is very dear and important to me, and must be kept sacred at all costs. again i thank you and everyone else for your comments.
0Mar 19, '13 by WeepingAngel, ADN, RN, EMT-BQuote from J.R.theR.N2bI apologize for offending you, but I still don't see what the above has to do with videotaping a medical procedure.my one and only hospitalization was in february of 1995. i was admitted for a cardiac catheterization and was told i would stay overnight and be discharged the next day. after arriving at the appointed time of six am i was prepped and awaiting the procedure by seven am. a patient of the cardiologist scheduled to do the caths that day had a patient have a heart attack earlier that morning, and it was after three in the afternoon before they could take me back for the procedure. i was asked if i wished to reschedule but since i was already registered and my iv was already in i decided to wait. the doc discovered blockages in three coronary arteries, and decided not to attempt angioplasty. my physician left for the night without informing me of what he had found. i was okay with this since i was told i would be spending the night afterward. later that night two nurses came to my room with orders i was to be transferred to the open heart unit. now i was scared, so scared that i refused to cooperate or go anywhere until i was informed just what was happening. my cardiologist was summoned back to the hospital, and after informing me of the blockages, bypass surgery was recommended, and i signed the consent without even looking through it.
0Mar 19, '13 by PoochiewoochieQuote from WeepingAngelEspecially since it happened in 1995. Kind of late to be worrying about whether you were videotaped, lol.I apologize for offending you, but I still don't see what the above has to do with videotaping a medical procedure.
0Mar 20, '13 by J.R.theR.N2bi was concerned that hospitals and physicians were attempting to somehow videotape a patient's procedure without adequately informing the patient of the possibility this may occur. i felt that it would take only minutes for a surgeon to tell the patient face to face when he/she obtained the original informed consent, especially if the procedure they were getting consent for was one that was certainly going to be taped. i never, however, had any ideas of the resultant videotapes or still photographs being used in a detrimental manner toward any patient, and even stated earier in this same post, that i would have consented to such taping if informed by the physician face to face. i felt that by "burying" the possibility of the taping in some fine print in the consent form was an attempt to bypass the patient in the hope they would not read the entire, lengthy consent form, assuming that the patient would refuse if imformed in the face to face manner i spoke of. after reading and considering all of your comments, especially from poochiewoochie, who included an actual consent form, i now realize i was wrong in my thinking. there is no reason that such a short, clear, and concise consent form could not be read in its entirety and completely understood by any competent patient, so i apologize for being difficult. finally, for weeping angel, after rereading the post you questioned, i myself fail to see what it had to do with videotaping. i have no problem accepting your apology and hope you will continue to voice your opinion on whatever i may post, even if you disagree.