The patient was to undergo a fundoplication surgery to repair an esophageal hernia. The procedure involves...

The patient was to undergo a fundoplication surgery to repair an esophageal hernia. The procedure involves the insertion of an esophageal dilator, which at this institution is performed by the anesthesia team. In this particular this particular instance, the dilator was to be inserted by a nursing anesthesia student. The student introduced himself to the patient immediately before the procedure. She used her first name only and stated that she was a registered nurse who would be working with the nurse anesthetist and anesthesiologist. The student referred to the nurse anesthetist by first and last names and the anesthesiologist using the term doctor and his last name. During the insertion of the dilator, the student tore the lining of the esophagus. This required an open procedure to be performed, which resulted in complications for the patient. The patient sued for lack of informed consent, inadequate supervision, and negligence. Specifically, the patient argued that he had the right to know if a student was to perform any part of the procedure and that he had the right to refuse participation. The court returned a verdict in favor of the patient on part of inadequate supervision. As stated in the institution's written policies, the student was to be supervised by an anesthesiologist, not merely a nurse anesthetist. Is the patient correct in asserting that he has a right to know the names and status of the ones performing the procedure? Did the way student introduce herself and the other two team members have relevance in the case? Was the informed consent deficient in the degree that there was a lack of informed consent by the patient?