Informed consent for penile prosthesis

International Journal of Impotence Research

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 37-50

  Nahrstadt, B C ^a  

^a Williams Montgomery and John Ltd   (United States)

Author keywords

Battery; Consent; Disclosure; Informed; Negligence; Prosthesis

Indexed keywords

4 AMINOBENZOATE POTASSIUM; ANTIBIOTIC AGENT; MINOCYCLINE; PAPAVERINE; PHENTOLAMINE MESYLATE; PROSTAGLANDIN E1; RIFAMPICIN; SILDENAFIL;

BLEEDING; CONSERVATIVE TREATMENT; DEVICE INFECTION; EJACULATION; ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION; HEMATOMA; INFORMED CONSENT; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MEDICAL CARE; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MEDICAL RECORD; NEGLIGENCE; PELVIS SURGERY; PENIS PROSTHESIS; POSTOPERATIVE INFECTION; POSTOPERATIVE PAIN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTHESIS FAILURE; READING; REVIEW; UROLOGIC SURGERY; VIDEOTAPE; VITAMIN SUPPLEMENTATION;

EDUCATIONAL STATUS; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; LANGUAGE; MALE; PAMPHLETS; PENILE PROSTHESIS; PENIS; VIDEOTAPE RECORDING;

EID: 58149510107     PISSN: 09559930     EISSN: 14765489     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ijir.2008.63     Document Type: Review

References (72)

1. George F. Evans, Jr., "Informed Consent: The Third Generation", p. 5 (Texas Medical Liability Trust 2004).
2. Id.
3. Pratt v. Davis, 79 N.E.2d 562 (Ill. 1906).
4. Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital, 211 N.Y. 125 (1914).
5. Moss v. Rishworth, 222 S.W.2d 225 (1920).
6. Evans, supra, note 1, p. 6.
7. Id.
8. Id.
9. Salgo v. Leland Stanford, Jr. University Board of Trustees, 317 P.2d 170 (Cal. App. 1957).
10. Evans, supra, note 1, p. 6.
11. See, e.g., Wilkinson v. Vesey, 295 A.2d 676 (R.I. 1972);
12. Gerety v. Demers, 589 P.2d 180, 190 (N.M. 1978).
13. st Dist. 1998).
14. th 1125 (Cal. App. 2006).
15. Id.
16. Truman v. Thomas, 611 P.2d 902 (1980).
17. Peterson v. Shields, 652 S.W.2d 929 (Tex. 1983).
18. Barclay v. Campbell, 704 S.W.2d 8 (Tex. 1986).
19. Evans, supra note 1, p. 10.
20. th 1285 (1997);
21. Peterson, supra note 14.
22. Id.
23. Cobbs v. Grant, 502 P.2d 1 (1972);
24. th 692 (Cal. App. 2001);
25. nd Dist. 2006).
26. th 692 (Cal. App. 2001).
27. Id. at p. 178.
28. th 749 (Cal. App. 2002).
29. Id.;
30. Halley v. Birbiglia, 458 N.E.2d 710 (Mass. 1983).
31. Only those doctors who have actively managed the plaintiff's care are held to be the ones with whom a duty rests to disclose information about necessary medical procedures. Townsend v. Turk, 218 Cal.App.3d 278 (Cal. App. 1990).
32. Ritter v. Delaney, 790 S.W.2d 29 (Tex. App. 1990).
33. See e.g., Mahannah v. Hirsch, 191 Cal.App.3d 1520 (Cal. App. 1987).
34. st Dist. 2004).
35. Id. at p. 1086.
36. Evans, supra note 1, p. 9.
37. Id. at p. 11.
38. Ramirez v. Plough, Inc., 863 P.2d 167 (Cal. App. 1993).
39. th 95 (Cal. App. 2005).
40. Id. at p. 115.
41. Evans, supra note 1, pp. 12-13.
42. Id. at p. 13.
43. Evans, supra note 1, p. 13.
44. Id.
45. Id.
46. Id. at p. 14.
47. Id. at p. 16.
48. Id. at pp. 20-21.
49. Id. at p. 21.
50. st Dist. 1999);
51. nd Dist. 2006).
52. Ashcraft v. King, 228 Cal.App.3d 604 (Cal. App. 1991).
53. See e.g., Hartfiel v. Owen, 618 S.W.2d 902 (Tex. App. 1981);
54. Trabal v. Queens Surgi-Center, 8 A.D.3d 555 (N.Y. 2004);
55. Mills v. Pate, 225 S.W.3d 277 (Tex. App. 2006).
56. Richard A. Santucci, MD, "Penile Prosthesis Implantation", http://www.emedicine.com/med/topic3047.htm.
57. Id.
58. Id.
59. Id.
60. Id.
61. Id.
62. Id.
63. Id.
64. Id.
65. East v. United States, 629 F.Supp. 682 (E.D. Mo. 1986).
66. Id. at p. 687.
67. Wenger v. Oregon Urology Clinic, 102 Or.App. 665, 796 P.2d 376 (Or. App. 1990).
68. Id. at p. 669-670.
69. Montgomery v. Bazaz-Sehgal, 568 Pa. 574, 798 A.2d 742 (Pa. 2002).
70. Id. at p. 584.
71. Id.
72. Id. at pp. 589-590.