title: Written consent is haphazard for minor urological procedures.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To determine the current practice among British urologists for obtaining written consent for flexible cystoscopy and other minor procedures under local anaesthesia.
  
  
  METHODS
  Postal questionnaires were sent to full members of The British Association of Urological Surgeons practising in the UK asking if they obtained written informed consent for local anesthetic procedures, e.g. flexible cystoscopy, urethral dilatation, and urethral catheterization for retention, for urodynamics or for intravesical chemotherapy. They were also asked whether they recorded that the risks and benefits of the procedure had been explained to the patient.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Respondents were divided on whether they obtained written consent for flexible cystoscopy and urethral dilatation. Most did not obtain written consent for catheterization for retention, urodynamics, intravesical chemotherapy or suprapubic catheterization. The policy was inconsistent both between and within urologists.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Given the medicolegal importance of informed consent, consensus among urologists is required so that national guidelines can be developed and a more rational policy applied.
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, St George's Hospital, London, UK.
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Hrouda
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Emberton
authors.forename: S J
authors.initials: SJ
authors.lastname: Hampson
mesh_terms: D003657:Decision Making; D006801:Humans; D007258:Informed Consent; D013511:Minor Surgical Procedures; D011364:Professional Practice; D014570:Urologic Diseases / Q000601:surgery*; D014572:Urology