[Legal considerations in eye surgery (author's transl)]

When the life of a patient depends upon an organ transplant it is justifiable to proceed with the operation without waiting for permission from the donor's relatives. Strictly speaking this situation does not apply to corneal transplantation. Although malpractice--which is not identical with common law liability--is defined restrictively, numerous liability claims against doctors arise due to inadequate explanation of proposed procedures. Doctors must pay more attention to the patient's right to information. However, in striving to respect the patient's right to choose for himself one should not dwell unnecessarily on possible complications, thereby unsettling or frightening the patient. The four operative categories, namely emergency procedure, operation of choice, prophylactic operation and cosmetic operation, require, in that order, increasingly thorough preoperative discussion with the patient. The various means of proving that a patient has indeed been adequately informed preoperatively are discussed and the shortcomings of forms are mentioned. An entry in the medical records containing details of the preoperative discussion with the patient should become routine. The commonest mistakes leading to malpractice suits against ophthalmologists in the USA are briefly mentioned.