This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Robert McNamara, MD
Medical College of Pennsylvania Philadelphia

JAMA. 1995;274(2):129.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply.

—Drs Brattebø and Wisborg raise an interesting point about practicing procedures on living patients. However, consent forms for surgery and other procedures are usually worded in such a way that the attending physicians "may utilize assistants" as they see fit. In my practice, this is how many such teaching activities are justified on living patients. I do agree that in circumstances such as the resuscitation of a dying patient, this is a gray area, and the patient and family are often unaware of what actually transpires.

On the other hand, I do not think that having a narrow majority of patient families in the studies¹ agree to such teaching activities creates a clear mandate to allow for presumed consent for endotracheal intubation. Ideally, a policy should be crafted that all levels of the health care team would be aware of and support. Input into such a policy . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?