title: [Legal responsibilities in patient explanation prior to ethmoid surgery].
abstract: The Superior Court of Stuttgart sentenced an E.N.T. surgeon for neglecting to explain the possible consequences and dangers to life of radical maxillary surgery and ethmoidectomy. As a result of this surgery meningitis occurred. The Court decided that the operative risks carried by surgeons is greater outside University or large hospitals. The Court therefore demanded full preoperative explaination only at the smaller hospital. Comparison of statistics from between the Tübingen University E.N.T. Clinic and a non-teaching clinic confirmed that the operative risks with ethmoid surgery is lower with the latter unit, and the the judgement of the Stuttgart Superior Court is based on fallacy. The further views and conclusions of the court are critically reviewed, and aspects of patient clarification are discussed.
mesh_terms: D005004:Ethmoid Bone / Q000601:surgery*; D005260:Female; D005860:Germany, West; D006801:Humans; D007258:Informed Consent; D007603:Jurisprudence; D007883:Legislation, Medical; D008318:Malpractice; D012306:Risk
vernacular_title: Zur Frage der Aufklärung vor Siebbeineingriffen (Zweierlei Mass für Universitätskliniken und Belegkrankenhäuser? Kritik eines Urteils des OLG Stuttgart vom 16.1.1973--16 U 50/72--)