Refusal of Blood in a Patient with Decision-Making Capacity
Mr. Alvarez is a 62-year-old man on postoperative day 2 after open reduction and internal fixation of a right hip fracture. His hemoglobin has fallen from 9.8 to 6.4 g/dL. He is alert, oriented, and mildly tachycardic at 118 beats/min with blood pressure 96/58 mmHg and reports dizziness when sitting up. He states clearly, “No blood products-that is against my religion,” and accurately explains the risks of refusing, including worsening anemia and cardiac strain. His adult children are at the bedside and insist he is confused because of the low blood count. The surgeon documents that the patient is “not making sense” and asks you to obtain the wife’s signature on a transfusion consent. The patient has a signed advance directive refusing blood. You have 10 minutes before the next scheduled pain medication.
1. What is your immediate priority regarding consent and the patient’s decision, and what capacity assessment would you document?
Read the worked answer
Capacity is decision-specific and does not require agreement with the team. Mr. Alvarez is alert, oriented, and can state the decision, explain the consequences of refusing blood, and apply the information to his own situation; he also repeats the choice consistently. That supports capacity to refuse. The wife cannot consent for a competent adult, and a signed advance directive reinforces his refusal. My priority is to not obtain the wife’s signature, not transfuse, and not allow the family or surgeon to coerce him. I would tell the family that he has explained the risks and that the team will monitor him closely, then notify the surgeon and charge nurse that I will not proceed. I would document his exact words, the risks he explained, the family’s pressure, and the surgeon’s request. If he later becomes delirious or hypotensive, I would reassess capacity, not assume it.
2. The surgeon insists and says, “Just get the wife to sign; he’s hypoxic.” What actions do you take, and how do you document?
Read the worked answer
I would use graded assertiveness and chain of command. First, state the facts: “He is alert, oriented, and has explained the risks; he has a signed directive; I cannot witness consent from his wife.” If the surgeon continues, I would ask the charge nurse and nursing supervisor to intervene, contact the ethics committee or risk management, and request a formal capacity consultation. I would stay with the patient to prevent coercion, continue monitoring vital signs and mental status, and avoid any transfusion. Documentation should be contemporaneous and factual: quotes from the patient, family, and surgeon; times; who was notified; the capacity findings; and that no consent was obtained from the wife. I would not document opinions like “surgeon is angry” without facts. This protects the patient’s autonomy and the nurse’s license.
3. What alternatives and monitoring will you discuss with the team while respecting refusal?
Read the worked answer
While respecting refusal, the team can optimize oxygen-carrying capacity and reduce demand. I would discuss minimizing blood draws, checking whether IV iron is appropriate, reviewing medications that worsen anemia or bleeding, maintaining normothermia, giving oxygen if hypoxemic, and treating pain and nausea. Monitoring includes mental status, heart rate, blood pressure, perfusion, urine output, and symptoms of cardiac ischemia; hemoglobin may be checked only when it will change management. I would clarify code status and ensure the patient knows he can change his mind. If he becomes unstable, I would reassess capacity and, if he loses capacity, follow the advance directive and emergency provisions. The plan must be documented and communicated to the family and team so everyone understands that refusal is not abandonment.