Identifying whether a patient’s expectations are realistic and ensuring they give valid consent to the intended surgery are essential steps prior to a cosmetic procedure, says the Medical Protection Society (MPS) in response to the Department of Health’s Review of the Regulation of Cosmetic Interventions1.
Dr Stephanie Bown, Director of Policy and Communications at MPS says, "Given the growth and range of procedures carried out by disparate practitioners – some of whom aren’t regulated – it is more important than ever to ensure there is accountability for quality of care in cosmetic surgery. We hope that this review will lead to wider regulatory control and ensure that patients are only treated by competent and experienced practitioners, and so improve patient safety."
Informed consent
"In our experience of claims in surgical specialties, more than half of claims are brought for reasons not directly related to surgical technique. Issues surrounding consent were present in nearly 10% of settled claims, along with post-operative care (6.8%), choice of procedure (8.1%) and lack of follow-up (1.4%)2.
"Of the surgical technique cases settled because of an unsatisfactory cosmetic result, all of these occurred in plastic/cosmetic practice, with nearly half relating to breast procedures and a third to facial procedures. Patients who have been closely involved in discussions about the options available, the potential solutions and the risks involved, are less likely to take legal action should an unsatisfactory result occur, particularly if these discussions are well documented."
Patient expectations
"It is important to identify whether the patient’s expectations are realistic and achievable and that both the practitioner and the patient agree on the intended outcome.
"Images within celebrity culture and some advertising by providers can raise expectations of what is achievable, which can lead to dissatisfaction following a procedure. Although patients considering cosmetic surgery should satisfy themselves that they are aware of the potential risks, the practitioner should take responsibility for ensuring that careful screening of the patient is conducted, including assessment of their psychological profile and any vulnerability they may have."
If something goes wrong
"Even in the most competent surgical hands, there can be complications, which reinforces the importance of comprehensive records to show the decision-making process, and to ensure that patients can access redress where appropriate.
"MPS strongly believes that practitioners should have appropriate indemnity arrangements to ensure that no patient who suffers avoidable harm is left uncompensated and there is a need for clarity on who is responsible for ensuring appropriate indemnity arrangements are in place."
More information
For further information please contact Kim Watson, Press Officer at MPS on +44 207 399 1409 or email [email protected].
Notes to editors
- MPS has responded to the Department of Health’s consultation: ‘Review of the Regulation of Cosmetic Interventions – Call for Evidence’.
- This figure is taken from a study of over 800 claims settled over the last four years on behalf of MPS member worldwide, in a range of surgical specialties. An article on the study can be found in MPS’s Casebook (May 2012) – Closing the loop: lessons from surgical cases