Permitted disclosures without authorization US Medical PG Practice Questions and MCQs
Practice US Medical PG questions for Permitted disclosures without authorization. These multiple choice questions (MCQs) cover important concepts and help you prepare for your exams.
Permitted disclosures without authorization US Medical PG Question 1: A 79-year-old male presents to your office for his annual flu shot. On physical exam you note several linear bruises on his back. Upon further questioning he denies abuse from his daughter and son-in-law, who live in the same house. The patient states he does not want this information shared with anyone. What is the most appropriate next step, paired with its justification?
- A. Breach patient confidentiality, as this patient's care should be discussed with the daughter as she is his primary caregiver
- B. See the patient back in 2 weeks and assess whether the patient's condition has improved, as his condition is not severe
- C. Do not break patient confidentiality, as elder abuse reporting is not mandatory
- D. Do not break patient confidentiality, as this would potentially worsen the situation
- E. Breach patient confidentiality, as this patient is a potential victim of elder abuse and reporting is mandated in most states (Correct Answer)
Permitted disclosures without authorization Explanation: ***Breach patient confidentiality, as this patient is a potential victim of elder abuse and reporting is mandated in most states***
- As a physician, there is a **legal and ethical obligation** to report suspected elder abuse in most US states, even when the patient denies it and requests confidentiality.
- Physicians are typically **mandatory reporters** under state law, and must report to Adult Protective Services or law enforcement when elder abuse is suspected.
- The patient's safety and legal requirements outweigh the right to confidentiality in jurisdictions with mandatory reporting laws.
*Breach patient confidentiality, as this patient's care should be discussed with the daughter as she is his primary caregiver*
- Breaching confidentiality to discuss this with the daughter would be inappropriate, especially since the daughter and son-in-law are the **suspected abusers**.
- Discussing with the primary caregiver is only appropriate if the patient has given **explicit consent** and there are no suspicions of abuse from that caregiver.
*See the patient back in 2 weeks and assess whether the patient's condition has improved, as his condition is not severe*
- This option is inappropriate because it delays intervention in a potentially **dangerous situation**.
- Suspected abuse warrants **immediate action** to ensure the patient's safety, regardless of the perceived severity of current injuries.
*Do not break patient confidentiality, as elder abuse reporting is not mandatory*
- In **most states**, physicians have **mandatory reporting laws** for elder abuse, making this statement generally incorrect.
- Physicians are typically considered "mandated reporters" and are legally required to report suspected abuse to the appropriate authorities in their jurisdiction.
*Do not break patient confidentiality, as this would potentially worsen the situation*
- While this is a valid concern in some situations, the **primary responsibility** of a physician is to protect vulnerable patients from harm.
- Reporting suspected abuse initiates protective measures and is legally required in most states, as the potential benefit of intervention outweighs the risk of worsening the situation.
Permitted disclosures without authorization US Medical PG Question 2: A 28-year-old woman dies shortly after receiving a blood transfusion. Autopsy reveals widespread intravascular hemolysis and acute renal failure. Investigation reveals that she received type A blood, but her medical record indicates she was type O. In a malpractice lawsuit, which of the following elements must be proven?
- A. Duty, breach, causation, and damages (Correct Answer)
- B. Only duty and breach
- C. Only breach and causation
- D. Duty, breach, and damages
Permitted disclosures without authorization Explanation: ***Duty, breach, causation, and damages***
- In a medical malpractice lawsuit, all four elements—**duty, breach, causation, and damages**—must be proven for a successful claim.
- The healthcare provider had a **duty** to provide competent care, they **breached** that duty by administering the wrong blood type, this breach **caused** the patient's death and renal failure, and these injuries constitute **damages**.
*Only duty and breach*
- While **duty** and **breach** are necessary components, proving only these two is insufficient for a malpractice claim.
- It must also be demonstrated that the breach directly led to the patient's harm and resulted in legally recognized damages.
*Only breach and causation*
- This option omits the crucial elements of professional **duty** owed to the patient and the resulting **damages**.
- A claim cannot succeed without establishing that a duty existed and that quantifiable harm occurred.
*Duty, breach, and damages*
- This option misses the critical element of **causation**, which links the provider's breach of duty to the patient's injuries.
- Without proving that the breach *caused* the damages, even if a duty was owed and breached, and damages occurred, the claim would fail.
Permitted disclosures without authorization US Medical PG Question 3: A 72-year-old man presents to his primary care provider at an outpatient clinic for ongoing management of his chronic hypertension. His past medical history is significant for diabetes and osteoarthritis though neither are currently being treated with medication. At this visit, his blood pressure is found to be 154/113 mmHg so he is started on lisinopril. After leaving the physician's office, he visits his local pharmacy and fills the prescription for lisinopril before going home. If this patient is insured by medicare with a prescription drug benefit provided by a private company through medicare, which of the following components of medicare are being used during this visit?
- A. Part A alone
- B. Parts A and B
- C. Parts B and D (Correct Answer)
- D. Parts A, B, C and D
- E. Part B alone
Permitted disclosures without authorization Explanation: ***Parts B and D***
- The visit to the **primary care provider** at an outpatient clinic for hypertension management is covered under **Medicare Part B** (medical insurance), which includes doctor's services and outpatient care.
- The prescription for lisinopril, filled at a local pharmacy with a prescription drug benefit provided by a private company through Medicare, signifies the use of **Medicare Part D** for prescription drug coverage.
*Part A alone*
- **Medicare Part A** covers hospital insurance, including inpatient hospital stays, skilled nursing facility care, hospice care, and some home health services.
- This scenario describes an **outpatient visit** and a **prescription fill**, neither of which falls under Part A coverage.
*Parts A and B*
- While Part B is correctly identified as covering the outpatient visit, **Part A** is not applicable as the patient was neither hospitalized nor receiving skilled nursing or hospice care.
- The scenario also involves a **prescription drug benefit**, which is covered by Part D, not Part A or B.
*Parts A, B, C and D*
- This option would imply coverage for inpatient care (A), outpatient care (B), a managed care plan (C), and prescription drugs (D).
- Although Part B and Part D are relevant, there is no mention of an inpatient stay (Part A) or an enrollment in a Medicare Advantage Plan (Part C) that would consolidate these benefits.
*Part B alone*
- **Medicare Part B** covers the outpatient visit to the primary care provider. However, it **does not cover prescription drugs** obtained from a pharmacy.
- The patient filled a prescription, which specifically falls under **Medicare Part D**.
Permitted disclosures without authorization US Medical PG Question 4: A 27-year-old woman presents with painful urination and malodorous urethral discharge. She states she has a single sexual partner and uses condoms for contraception. The patient's blood pressure is 115/80 mm Hg, the heart rate is 73/min, the respiratory rate is 14/min, and the temperature is 36.6℃ (97.9℉). Physical examination shows swelling and redness of the external urethral ostium. There is a yellowish, purulent discharge with an unpleasant odor. The swab culture grows N. gonorrhoeae. The doctor explains the diagnosis to the patient, and they discuss the importance of notifying her partner. The patient says she doesn't want her partner to know about her diagnosis and begs the doctor to not inform the health department. She is anxious that everybody will find out that she is infected and that her partner will leave her. She promises they will use barrier contraception while she is treated. Which of the following is the most appropriate course of action?
- A. Let the patient do as she suggests, because it is her right not to disclose her diagnosis to anyone.
- B. Tell the patient that she is required to tell her partner and stress the consequences of untreated gonorrhea in her partner.
- C. Refer to the medical ethics committee for consultation.
- D. Encourage her to tell her partner because it is a way to protect her partner from possible complications, and reassure her that the confidence will only be shared with her partner.
- E. Explain to the patient that gonorrhea is a mandatory reported disease. (Correct Answer)
Permitted disclosures without authorization Explanation: ***Explain to the patient that gonorrhea is a mandatory reported disease.***
- **Gonorrhea** is a **nationally notifiable disease**, meaning healthcare providers are **legally required by state and local public health laws** to report cases to public health authorities. This reporting is crucial for **disease surveillance**, contact tracing, and public health control.
- While respecting patient confidentiality is paramount, **state public health statutes mandate reporting** of sexually transmitted infections like gonorrhea. HIPAA explicitly **permits disclosure to public health authorities** for disease control purposes without requiring patient consent.
- The physician should explain this legal obligation to the patient while maintaining a supportive, non-judgmental approach to preserve the therapeutic relationship.
*Let the patient do as she suggests, because it is her right not to disclose her diagnosis to anyone.*
- While patient autonomy and confidentiality are crucial, the **public health implications** of a sexually transmitted infection (STI) like gonorrhea mean that disclosure to public health authorities for contact tracing is legally mandated in the United States.
- Allowing the patient to withhold this information from public health authorities could lead to **further transmission** and potential severe health consequences for her partner and community, contradicting the physician's ethical and legal duty to prevent harm.
*Tell the patient that she is required to tell her partner and stress the consequences of untreated gonorrhea in her partner.*
- The patient is **not legally required** to inform her partner directly; rather, the **physician is required to report to public health authorities**, who then handle partner notification through confidential processes.
- While educating the patient about the **risks of untreated gonorrhea** in her partner is important, directing her to notify her partner herself could be perceived as coercive and may damage the patient-physician relationship without ensuring compliance.
*Refer to the medical ethics committee for consultation.*
- While ethical dilemmas can warrant committee consultation, the reporting of **notifiable diseases** like gonorrhea is typically governed by clear legal statutes and public health regulations, making a consultation unnecessary for this specific issue.
- Referring to an ethics committee would delay crucial public health interventions, such as **partner notification** and contact tracing, which are time-sensitive for preventing further spread of the infection.
*Encourage her to tell her partner because it is a way to protect her partner from possible complications, and reassure her that the confidence will only be shared with her partner.*
- Encouraging disclosure is good practice, but reassuring her that confidence will "only" be shared with her partner is **misleading and incorrect**, as the physician is legally obligated to report gonorrhea to the health department.
- This approach fails to address the mandatory reporting requirement, potentially placing the physician in a difficult ethical and legal position and violating public health law.
Permitted disclosures without authorization US Medical PG Question 5: A 26-year-old man comes to the emergency department because of a 1-week history of fever, throat pain, and difficulty swallowing. Head and neck examination shows an erythematous pharynx with purulent exudates overlying the palatine tonsils. Microscopic examination of a throat culture shows pink, spherical bacteria arranged in chains. Treatment with amoxicillin is initiated. A day later, a physician colleague from another department approaches the physician in the lobby of the hospital and asks about this patient, saying, "Did you see him? What does he have? He's someone I play football with and he hasn't come to play for the past 5 days. I'm worried about him." Which of the following is the most appropriate action by the physician?
- A. Inform the colleague that they should ask the patient's attending physician
- B. Inform the colleague that they cannot divulge any information about the patient (Correct Answer)
- C. Tell the colleague the patient's case file number so they can look it up themselves
- D. Tell the colleague that they cannot tell them the diagnosis but that their friend was treated with antibiotics
- E. Ask the colleague to meet in the office so they can discuss the patient in private
Permitted disclosures without authorization Explanation: ***Inform the colleague that they cannot divulge any information about the patient***
- The **Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)** strictly prohibits the disclosure of a patient's **Protected Health Information (PHI)** without their explicit consent.
- Even if the inquirer knows the patient, a physician-patient relationship creates a **duty of confidentiality** that supersedes personal acquaintance.
- Disclosing any information without patient consent, even to another physician, violates HIPAA regulations.
*Tell the colleague the patient's case file number so they can look it up themselves*
- Providing the case file number would enable unauthorized access to the patient's medical records, thereby violating **patient confidentiality** and **HIPAA regulations**.
- This action does not rectify the breach of confidentiality and escalates the potential for further misuse of PHI.
*Inform the colleague that they should ask the patient's attending physician*
- Recommending that the colleague ask the attending physician shifts the burden but does not address the underlying ethical and legal obligation of the current physician to maintain **confidentiality**.
- The attending physician would also be bound by **HIPAA** and ethical guidelines not to disclose information without consent.
*Tell the colleague that they cannot tell them the diagnosis but that their friend was treated with antibiotics*
- While seemingly less specific, stating that the friend was treated with **antibiotics** is still a disclosure of **Protected Health Information (PHI)**.
- This action violates **patient confidentiality** as it reveals a detail of the patient's medical management without consent.
*Ask the colleague to meet in the office so they can discuss the patient in private*
- Moving to a private setting does not negate the fact that discussing the patient's information with an unauthorized individual is a **breach of confidentiality**.
- The location of the conversation does not change the ethical and legal obligations to protect **PHI**.
Permitted disclosures without authorization US Medical PG Question 6: A 68-year-old man comes to the emergency department because of sudden onset abdominal pain for 6 hours. On a 10-point scale, he rates the pain as a 8 to 9. The abdominal pain is worst in the right upper quadrant. He has atrial fibrillation and hyperlipidemia. His temperature is 38.7° C (101.7°F), pulse is 110/min, and blood pressure is 146/86 mm Hg. The patient appears acutely ill. Physical examination shows a distended abdomen and tenderness to palpation in all quadrants with guarding, but no rebound. Murphy's sign is positive. Right upper quadrant ultrasound shows thickening of the gallbladder wall, sludging in the gallbladder, and pericolic fat stranding. He is admitted for acute cholecystitis and grants permission for cholecystectomy. His wife is his healthcare power of attorney (POA), but she is out of town on a business trip. He is accompanied today by his brother. After induction and anesthesia, the surgeon removes the gallbladder but also finds a portion of the small intestine is necrotic due to a large thromboembolism occluding a branch of the superior mesenteric artery. The treatment is additional surgery with small bowel resection and thromboendarterectomy. Which of the following is the most appropriate next step in management?
- A. Decrease the patient's sedation until he is able to give consent
- B. Contact the patient's healthcare POA to consent
- C. Proceed with additional surgery without obtaining consent (Correct Answer)
- D. Ask the patient's brother in the waiting room to consent
- E. Close the patient and obtain re-consent for a second operation
Permitted disclosures without authorization Explanation: ***Proceed with additional surgery without obtaining consent***
- In an **emergency situation** where immediate intervention is required to save a patient's life or prevent serious harm, and the patient **lacks capacity** to consent, explicit consent for additional necessary procedures is not required. The surgeon can proceed based on the principle of **implied consent** in emergencies.
- The discovery of **necrotic small bowel due to thromboembolism** is a life-threatening condition requiring urgent surgical intervention in an already sedated patient, making it an emergency.
*Decrease the patient's sedation until he is able to give consent*
- Decreasing sedation to obtain consent in this critical situation would cause a **dangerous delay** in treating a life-threatening condition (bowel necrosis) and could lead to worsening outcomes or death.
- The patient is **acutely ill** and likely in a state where he cannot grasp information and make decisions, even with reduced sedation, thus true informed consent would be difficult to obtain quickly.
*Contact the patient's healthcare POA to consent*
- Contacting the POA who is out of town would introduce **significant and potentially fatal delays** in treating a rapidly progressing, life-threatening condition.
- While POAs are crucial for non-emergent decision-making, the **principle of preserving life** takes precedence in an acute emergency when a delay would cause irreversible harm.
*Ask the patient's brother in the waiting room to consent*
- The brother is **not the designated healthcare POA** and there is no indication he has legal authority to make medical decisions for the patient.
- Relying on a non-POA family member for consent in an emergency, when the patient's legally appointed surrogate is known, is generally **not the appropriate first step** unless no other option exists and the brother can confirm the patient's wishes from prior discussions, which is not stated.
*Close the patient and obtain re-consent for a second operation*
- Closing the patient and then re-opening for another surgery would expose the patient to **two separate anesthetic events and surgical procedures**, significantly increasing morbidity and mortality risks compared to continuous surgery.
- This option would also introduce an **unacceptable delay** in addressing the acute bowel necrosis, which requires immediate intervention.
Permitted disclosures without authorization US Medical PG Question 7: An 86-year-old man is admitted to the hospital for management of pneumonia. His hospital course has been relatively uneventful, and he is progressing well. On morning rounds nearing the end of the patient's hospital stay, the patient's cousin finally arrives to the hospital for the first time after not being present for most of the patient's hospitalization. He asks about the patient's prognosis and potential future discharge date as he is the primary caretaker of the patient and needs to plan for his arrival home. The patient is doing well and can likely be discharged in the next few days. Which of the following is the most appropriate course of action?
- A. Bring the cousin to the room and explain the plan to both the patient and cousin
- B. Explain the plan to discharge the patient in the next few days
- C. Explain that you cannot discuss the patient's care at this time
- D. Tell the cousin that you do not know the patient's course well
- E. Bring the cousin to the room and ask the patient if it is acceptable to disclose his course (Correct Answer)
Permitted disclosures without authorization Explanation: ***Bring the cousin to the room and ask the patient if it is acceptable to disclose his course***
- This option prioritizes **patient autonomy** and privacy by allowing the patient to decide if their medical information can be shared with the cousin.
- Even if the cousin is the primary caretaker, explicit permission from the patient is required under **HIPAA** rules before disclosing protected health information.
- This approach balances **confidentiality protection** with practical discharge planning needs.
*Bring the cousin to the room and explain the plan to both the patient and cousin*
- This option prematurely assumes the patient's consent to share information with the cousin, which may violate **patient privacy**.
- While it facilitates communication, it bypasses the critical step of confirming the patient's willingness to disclose their medical details.
- This constitutes a **HIPAA violation** by disclosing information before obtaining consent.
*Explain the plan to discharge the patient in the next few days*
- Disclosing this information solely to the cousin without the patient's explicit permission constitutes a **breach of confidentiality**.
- This action violates **HIPAA regulations**, even if the cousin is identified as the primary caretaker.
- Protected health information (PHI) cannot be shared with family members without patient authorization.
*Explain that you cannot discuss the patient's care at this time*
- While protecting patient privacy, this response is overly abrupt and unhelpful, potentially creating **frustration** and hindering discharge planning.
- It does not offer a constructive path toward obtaining consent or addressing the cousin's legitimate concerns as a caretaker.
- A better approach involves facilitating consent rather than simply refusing communication.
*Tell the cousin that you do not know the patient's course well*
- This statement is **untruthful** and unprofessional, as the physician on rounds is expected to be knowledgeable about their patient's condition.
- It undermines trust and misrepresents the physician's duty to provide accurate information when appropriate.
- Dishonesty is never an acceptable approach to navigating privacy concerns.
Permitted disclosures without authorization US Medical PG Question 8: An 86-year-old male is admitted to the hospital under your care for management of pneumonia. His hospital course has been relatively uneventful, and he is progressing well. While making morning rounds on your patients, the patient's cousin approaches you in the hallway and asks about the patient's prognosis and potential future discharge date. The patient does not have an advanced directive on file and does not have a medical power of attorney. Which of the following is the best course of action?
- A. Direct the cousin to the patient's room, telling him that you will be by within the hour to discuss the plan.
- B. Explain that you cannot discuss the patient's care without explicit permission from the patient themselves. (Correct Answer)
- C. Provide the cousin with the patient's most recent progress notes and a draft of his discharge summary.
- D. Explain that the patient is progressing well and should be discharged within the next few days.
- E. Refer the cousin to ask the patient's wife about these topics.
Permitted disclosures without authorization Explanation: ***Explain that you cannot discuss the patient's care without explicit permission from the patient themselves.***
- This is the **correct ethical and legal action** in healthcare to maintain patient confidentiality, as the patient has not designated a medical power of attorney or filed an advance directive.
- The **Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)** protects patient health information, requiring explicit patient consent before disclosure to anyone, including family members, unless specific exceptions apply (e.g., immediate threat to safety, treatment purposes directly).
*Direct the cousin to the patient's room, telling him that you will be by within the hour to discuss the plan.*
- While ultimately the patient needs to be involved, directly discussing **private health information** with the cousin without the patient's consent first is a breach of **confidentiality**.
- This approach prematurely assumes the patient will grant permission or wishes for this specific family member to be involved, which might not be true.
*Provide the cousin with the patient's most recent progress notes and a draft of his discharge summary.*
- This action represents a clear and significant **breach of patient confidentiality** and **HIPAA regulations**.
- Without explicit patient consent, sharing detailed medical records with anyone, including family, is strictly prohibited.
*Explain that the patient is progressing well and should be discharged within the next few days.*
- Even a general statement about the patient's condition and discharge plans can be considered a **breach of confidentiality** under HIPAA.
- Such information, while seemingly innocuous, reveals that the individual is indeed a patient and implies details about their health status, which requires patient consent to disclose.
*Refer the cousin to ask the patient's wife about these topics.*
- There is no information provided that the **patient's wife** has legal authority (e.g., **medical power of attorney**) or explicit permission from the patient to discuss his medical information.
- Referring the cousin to the wife without verifying her authority could lead to further breaches of **confidentiality** if the wife is not authorized to share such details.
Permitted disclosures without authorization US Medical PG Question 9: A 36-year-old man comes to the physician because of a 2-week history of productive cough, weight loss, and intermittent fever. He recently returned from a 6-month medical deployment to Indonesia. He appears tired. Physical examination shows nontender, enlarged, palpable cervical lymph nodes. An x-ray of the chest shows right-sided hilar lymphadenopathy. A sputum smear shows acid-fast bacilli. A diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis is made from PCR testing of the sputum. The patient requests that the physician does not inform anyone of this diagnosis because he is worried about losing his job. Which of the following is the most appropriate initial action by the physician?
- A. Request the patient's permission to discuss the diagnosis with an infectious disease specialist
- B. Assure the patient that his diagnosis will remain confidential
- C. Confirm the diagnosis with a sputum culture
- D. Notify all of the patient's household contacts of the diagnosis
- E. Inform the local public health department of the diagnosis (Correct Answer)
Permitted disclosures without authorization Explanation: ***Inform the local public health department of the diagnosis***
- **Tuberculosis** is a **reportable disease** to public health authorities due to its significant public health implications, including the risk of transmission.
- Physicians have a **legal and ethical obligation** to report such diagnoses to protect the community, even against a patient's wishes for secrecy.
*Request the patient's permission to discuss the diagnosis with an infectious disease specialist*
- While consulting an infectious disease specialist is often beneficial for managing TB, the immediate and most appropriate initial action is related to **public health notification**.
- Delaying notification to seek patient permission first would **compromise public health safety** regarding a reportable disease.
*Assure the patient that his diagnosis will remain confidential*
- This assurance would be **misleading and unethical** because TB is a reportable condition, meaning its confidentiality is necessarily breached for public health purposes.
- Physicians are bound by law to report communicable diseases, which supersedes general confidentiality in this specific context.
*Confirm the diagnosis with a sputum culture*
- The diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis has already been established by a **sputum smear showing acid-fast bacilli** and **PCR testing**, which are highly reliable.
- While a sputum culture provides drug susceptibility information, it is not the *initial* most appropriate action regarding the patient's stated concerns about confidentiality in the context of a reportable disease.
*Notify all of the patient's household contacts of the diagnosis*
- While contact tracing is an important part of TB control, it is typically initiated and managed by the **public health department** after notification.
- The physician's primary responsibility is to notify the health department, who then assumes the role of **contact investigation** and management.
Permitted disclosures without authorization US Medical PG Question 10: A 78-year-old woman is brought to the emergency ward by her son for lethargy and generalized weakness. The patient speaks in short utterances and does not make eye contact with the provider or her son throughout the interview and examination. You elicit that the patient lives with her son and daughter-in-law, and she reports vague weakness for the last couple days. The emergency room provider notices 3-4 healing bruises on the patient's upper extremities; otherwise, examination is not revealing. Routine chemistries and blood counts are unremarkable; non-contrast head CT demonstrates normal age-related changes. Which of the following is the most appropriate next step in management?
- A. Ask the patient's son to leave the room (Correct Answer)
- B. Question the patient's son regarding the home situation
- C. Call Adult Protective Services to report the patient's son
- D. Perform lumbar puncture
- E. Question the patient regarding abuse or neglect
Permitted disclosures without authorization Explanation: ***Ask the patient's son to leave the room***
- The patient's **lethargy**, **non-engagement**, and **healing bruises** raise strong suspicions for elder abuse or neglect. Removing the son allows for a private interview, which is crucial for her to feel safe enough to disclose information.
- In situations of suspected abuse, it is paramount to prioritize the **patient's safety and ability to speak freely** without the presence of the suspected abuser.
*Question the patient's son regarding the home situation*
- Questioning the son directly at this point may escalate the situation or make the patient even less likely to disclose abuse, as she is likely **frightened or coerced**.
- This step is premature and should only occur after a private interview with the patient, and potentially with the involvement of Protective Services.
*Call Adult Protective Services to report the patient's son*
- While reporting to **Adult Protective Services** is a critical step if abuse is confirmed, it is not the immediate first action until a private interview with the patient has been conducted to gather more information.
- Making a report without attempting to speak with the patient alone first can hinder the investigation and potentially jeopardize her safety if the abuser is alerted prematurely.
*Perform lumbar puncture*
- A lumbar puncture is an invasive procedure generally performed to diagnose **central nervous system infections** or **inflammatory conditions**.
- There are no clinical indications (e.g., fever, meningeal signs, focal neurological deficits) to suggest a need for a lumbar puncture, especially given the history and physical findings that point towards abuse.
*Question the patient regarding abuse or neglect*
- While it's important to question the patient about abuse, it must be done in a **safe and private environment** where she feels comfortable speaking freely.
- Questioning her while the suspected abuser (her son) is present would likely yield unhelpful responses due to fear or intimidation, as seen by her lack of eye contact and short utterances.
More Permitted disclosures without authorization US Medical PG questions available in the OnCourse app. Practice MCQs, flashcards, and get detailed explanations.
