Consent to Record a Treatment: What to Document

More and more clinics record treatments. The reasons are good: training new staff, explaining to the patient after the treatment, comparing before and after, and documentation in case of a dispute. The recording also creates a new asset that is harder to protect than text: a large file, easy to copy, that unmistakably identifies the patient and often shows their body.

The problem in practice is not that clinics record without asking. They do ask. The problem is that the consent stays verbal, or on a page separated from the file, and then it is impossible to answer the simple questions: what exactly did the patient consent to, when, and who has viewed it since.

Consent is a record, not a moment

The prevailing thought is that consent is an event: the patient said yes. In practice, consent is an ongoing record that must answer, at any given moment, six questions.

Question	What must be kept
Who consented	The patient’s identity, and if relevant — a guardian or an attorney-in-fact, and their identity
Why they consented	Purposes of use marked separately: medical documentation, internal training, external presentation, marketing
On which wording	The version of the form that was actually shown, not just a reference to the current form
When	A timestamp, before the recording begins and not after
For how long	A retention period, and what happens at the end of it
How to withdraw	A clear channel of contact, and what actually happens to the material afterward

Separating the purposes is the most important clause

A patient who consents to the recording being kept in their file does not necessarily consent to it being shown at a conference. A single blanket consent is convenient for the clinic and weak in substance. Separating it into distinct checkboxes, each of which can be refused without harming the treatment, is both fairer and holds up better in an audit.

The rule worth stating explicitly on the form: refusing a recording for training or publication purposes does not affect the treatment itself. If the refusal does affect it — for example when the recording is an inseparable part of the procedure — that must be stated explicitly and explained.

What must be kept alongside the file itself

A video file with no context is a problem. The minimum information that must be linked to every recording:

• The patient and the visit the recording belongs to. Not a folder by date.
• The clinician who performed the treatment, and who started the recording.
• The consent record, including the version of the wording and the time of signature.
• Start and end times, and duration.
• Moment markers, if any were marked, so there is no need to scan the entire file.
• An access log: every view, download or share, with identity and date.

The access log is the item easiest to give up and the most important. Without it you cannot answer a patient who asks who saw the material, and you cannot identify misuse. With a log, the question becomes a one-minute answer.

The consent gate: a mechanism, not reliance on people

A procedure that says consent must be verified before recording will be violated at some point, because people are in a hurry. A mechanism that does not allow a recording to start until the consent record exists is not violated. That is the difference between a policy and a control.

Such a gate also needs an exception path: cases where the recording starts in a special mode. An exception should be possible, should require a justification, and should be flagged so that it can be reviewed after the fact. An exception that is not documented is exactly the hole through which problems enter.

A good question for self-assessment: if a patient asks tomorrow for all of their recordings and the list of everyone who viewed them, how long will it take to answer. If the answer is measured in days, the material is not managed, it is merely stored.

Retention, deletion and withdrawal of consent

Clinics tend to keep video forever, because deletion feels risky. That is a mistake from two directions. First, information kept without need is needless exposure. Second, a patient who withdraws consent for training purposes expects something to actually happen.

It is therefore worth defining in advance three separate periods: how long a recording that is part of the medical record is kept, how long a copy intended for training is kept, and what happens to copies already incorporated into teaching material. Withdrawal of consent applies going forward, and it is worth saying so clearly on the form, instead of promising an absolute deletion that cannot be delivered.

Three common failures

1. Recording on the clinician’s personal phone. Convenient, and it creates a copy outside any control, usually backed up automatically to a private cloud. If there is no convenient way to record through the system, this is what will happen.
2. Sharing over insecure channels. Sending a clip in an instant message to a colleague looks innocent, and it takes identifiable medical information outside the clinic with no record.
3. Consent signed after the treatment. Signing after the fact for something already filmed weakens the substantive validity, and also looks bad in any review.

A short procedure you can adopt

A clinic can write this on a single page: who is authorized to record; that recording starts only from within the visit in the system and only after a consent record; that every view is logged; that transferring material outside the system is forbidden except through a defined channel; what the retention period is for each purpose; and how a patient makes a request to view, receive a copy or withdraw. Once every six months it is recommended to pull a report of all views over the past month and go over it. This check takes a quarter of an hour, and reveals more than any declaration.

An important note: what is written here is a general professional explanation and is not legal advice. Consent wording for a specific clinic should be reviewed by an attorney familiar with the field.

Back to the blog