A competent adult on a busy surgical unit signed a procedure consent last night but now tells you before a scheduled blood transfusion setup that she no longer understands the risks and wants the doctor to explain again. The nurse is off the floor for five minutes. Which ethics and consent action should you take to honor informed consent?

Informed consent requires disclosure by the provider, understanding by a competent patient, voluntariness, and authorization, and it remains revocable when understanding lapses, so the PCT duty is to pause the task, affirm the right to information, and escalate to the nurse for provider re-education rather than proceeding or teaching beyond scope. Pausing preparation with prompt notification protects autonomy because it prevents action on uncertain consent while routing the question to the accountable clinician. Continuing because a signature exists fails by concept because a signed form documents a process that no longer holds when the patient states confusion, making reliance on paperwork alone ethically and legally insufficient. Personally explaining risks fails by concept because risk disclosure and answering detailed medical questions exceed PCT scope and create liability for incomplete or inaccurate information. Substituting family explanation fails by concept because consent is personal and nondelegable to relatives for a competent adult, and family reassurance does not restore the provider-patient understanding required. Exam caveat is to distinguish this from implied consent in true emergencies with incapacitated patients, which does not apply when a competent patient asks for clarification for a scheduled transfusion. Practical check is to stay with the patient if possible, notify the nurse directly, and document her exact words and your notification without charting consent counseling.