Skip navigation

informed consent

A jurisdictional review of the legislation governing informed consent by chiropractors across Canada

March 14, 2016

The objective of this jurisdictional review is to provide summary information pertaining to the regulation of chiropractors in Canadian provinces and territories on the topic of informed consent. Our review shows that two provinces have legislated for all healthcare professions: Ontario and Prince Edward Island. Two chiropractic regulatory bodies (New Brunswick and, Newfoundland and Labrador)

Read More

Chiropractic informed consent

August 12, 2014

Ethical concerns about informed consent encompass the legal functions of protection of patients through self-determination, but also considers other ways of respecting patients through seeking their benefit and their autonomy. The influence of traditional medicine on patient expectations, and use of consent forms often renders consent a difficult issue in the relative safety and non-invasiveness

Read More

La chiropratique et le consentement éclairé

August 12, 2014

Ethical concerns about informed consent encompass the legal functions of protection of patients through self-determination, but also considers other ways of respecting patients through seeking their benefit and their autonomy. The influence of traditional medicine on patient expectations, and use of consent forms often renders consent a difficult issue in the relative safety and non-invasiveness

Read More

Current standards of material risk

August 12, 2014

The infrequent occurrence of negative results of treatment from all types of health care occasionally results in litigation. The primary points of informed consent and material risk have received greater focus in law since 1980. Supreme Court and lower court cases have stressed the priority of patient’s rights to choose what is best for their

Read More

Chiropractic quality assurance: standards and guidelines

July 02, 2014

Chiropractic quality assurance involves development of both clinical guidelines and standards. Confusion generated by poor differentiation of guidelines from standards contributes to mistrust of the guideline development process. Guidelines are considered to be recommendations that allow for flexibility and individual patient differences. Standards are more binding and require a high level of supporting evidence. While

Read More

back to top