1. Informed consent for suspension microlaryngoscopy: what should we tell the patient? A consensus statement of the European Laryngological Society
- Author
-
Frederik G. Dikkers, Michel R. M. San Giorgi, Rico N. P. M. Rinkel, Marc Remacle, Antoine Giovanni, Małgorzata Wierzbicka, Riaz Seedat, Guillermo Campos, Guri S. Sandhu, Otolaryngology / Head & Neck Surgery, CCA - Cancer Treatment and quality of life, Ear, Nose and Throat, and APH - Quality of Care
- Subjects
Benign laryngeal pathology ,Elective suspension microlaryngoscopy ,Consensus ,Laryngoscopy ,Consent discussion ,General Medicine ,Quality modern health service ,Phonosurgery ,Europe ,Otorhinolaryngology ,Humans ,Health care provider ,Informed consent ,Societies, Medical ,Shared decision-making ,Consent process - Abstract
Introduction Informed consent for any surgical intervention is necessary, as only well-informed patients can actively participate in the decision-making process about their care, and better understand the likely or potential outcomes of their treatment. No consensus exists on informed consent for suspension microlaryngoscopy (SML). Materials and methods Informed consent procedures in nine countries on five continents were studied. Results Several risks can be discerned: risks of SML as procedure, anesthesiologic risks of SML, specific risks of phonosurgery, risks of inadequate glottic exposure or unexpected findings, risks of not treating. SML has recognized potential complications, that can be divided in temporary (minor) complications, and lasting (major) complications. Conclusion SML is a safe procedure with low morbidity, and virtually no mortality. Eleven recommendations are provided.
- Published
- 2022