Prevalence of pelvic examinations on anesthetized patients without informed consent.

Abstract

Context: The pelvic examination is a fundamental tool for the evaluation and diagnosis of women's health conditions and an important skill for all medical students to learn as future physicians for the early detection of treatable conditions such as infection or cancer. Although the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) asserts that performing pelvic examinations under anesthesia for educational purposes should only occur if the patient provides explicit and informed consent, there still have been reports of medical students performing pelvic examinations on anesthetized patients across the country, and many states are now starting to pass bills requiring informed patient consents to conduct pelvic examinations under anesthesia.

Objectives: The objectives of this study are to evaluate the prevalence of pelvic examinations performed by osteopathic medical students on anesthetized patients without consent while fulfilling their third-year OB-GYN clerkship requirements.

Methods: The survey was administered and distributed to all osteopathic medical schools in the country via the Student Osteopathic Medical Association's (SOMA's) chapter emails, outreach emails, and SOMA's social media accounts to collect data. Inclusion criteria included third- or fourth-year osteopathic medical students who completed their OB-GYN clerkship rotations when taking the survey. The exclusion criteria included any osteopathic medical student who had not completed their OB-GYN clerkship rotation. We utilized descriptive analysis to summarize the final data.

Results: We received 310 responses. The final number of responses was 291 after meeting the exclusion criteria. Most osteopathic medical students (94.2 %, n=274) considered the practice of performing pelvic examinations on anesthetized patients without their explicit consent unethical. Among the participants, 40.9 % (n=119) admitted to performing pelvic examinations on patients under anesthesia while on OB-GYN rotations, but most of them (57.1 %, n=68) did so without obtaining prior consent from the patients. Notably, the number of pelvic examinations performed by medical students on patients under anesthesia ranged widely from 1 to 25 with a median number of 10. Moreover, 58.9 % (n=70) indicated that they had not been properly educated to obtain specific consent before performing pelvic examinations under anesthesia. Many participants cited efficiency of practice, lack of policy awareness and personal education by medical students, and failure to refuse to perform pelvic examinations on anesthetized patients as trainees when asked by their seniors or preceptors.

Conclusions: This study demonstrates that although most osteopathic medical students consider performing pelvic examinations on anesthetized patients unethical, many still admit to practicing pelvic examinations on patients under anesthesia, while on OB-GYN rotations for efficiency of practice, lack of policy awareness and personal education, and being in unique positions in which grades are determined by seniors and preceptors for their willingness to do what is asked even if the practice does not align with their conviction. This study highlights the importance of ongoing research and implementation of policies at institutional and state levels that will procure the value of pelvic examinations while protecting and upholding the ethics of patients' rights and autonomy of medical students.