A 62-year-old outpatient scheduled for a barium enema brings a signed advance directive, asks that results not be shared with her waiting daughter, and appears anxious about bowel preparation. The daughter asks the technologist for findings in the hallway. Which action correctly applies consent, confidentiality, and patient-rights requirements for this examination?

The correct action is required because a barium enema is invasive with contrast risks, demanding bowel preparation and radiation exposure, so written informed consent must be confirmed privately after explaining risks, benefits, alternatives and preparation while addressing anxiety with supportive teaching, and confidentiality plus patient rights require honoring the competent adult's explicit refusal to share results with the waiting daughter by declining hallway disclosure and referring her to the patient or ordering provider. One distractor fails on consent validity because a signed advance directive records future life-sustaining preferences and surrogate authority, not current procedure-specific consent, so it cannot substitute for written barium-enema consent even with excellent privacy and teaching. Another distractor fails on autonomy and confidentiality because inviting family to stay for reassurance is routine compassionate practice for anxious outpatients, yet it overrides this patient's explicit request for privacy and private consent. A further distractor fails on consent level because scheduled attendance may supply implied consent for low-risk general radiography, but an invasive enema requires explicit written informed consent, so implied consent is insufficient despite honoring privacy. Exam caveat is to separate registration, advance directives, and procedure-specific consent under family pressure; practical check is to verify signed consent, document the privacy limit, and teach preparation privately.