Provide patients with information enabling active participation in their care decisions.

Bristol Heart Inquiry · Bristol Heart Inquiry — Final Report · Issued 18 July 2001

Government responseNot tracked (historical inquiry)

DeliveryDHSC and NHS England say in progress (Feb 2026)

Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry

●Inquiry recommendation

Patients must be given such information as enables them to participate in their care.

Bristol Heart Inquiry, Bristol Heart Inquiry — Final Report · 18 Jul 2001 Source PDF →

Government response

●No formal government response recorded

The Index has not yet recorded a verbatim government response to this recommendation.

Delivery

●DHSC and NHS England say in progress · 27 Feb 2026

Implemented as per Government response. Please see our responses to Recommendations 1 (patient centred care), 2 (shared decision-making), 4 (patient information) and 5 (personalised information).

From: The Thirlwall Inquiry: Review of Implementation of Recommendations from Previous Inquiries into Healthcare Issues (version dated April 2025)

Site note: DHSC and NHS England's own account of progress, supplied to the Thirlwall Inquiry in September 2024 and printed in the Inquiry legal team's Review of Implementation of Recommendations from Previous Inquiries into Healthcare Issues (version dated April 2025, published 27 February 2026). It is not a finding of the Inquiry. Their reviewed extent of implementation reads “Implemented – Ongoing”. Table row: section 6.2 No. 12, PDF page 75.

What other bodies have found

In their own words. These do not change the delivery statement above.

●Thirlwall Inquiry legal team · 27 Feb 2026

The Government agreed with this recommendation.

In its January 2002 response, the Department of Health said that the steps outlined in response to recommendations 1 to 11 would help ensure patients have access to information while receive care, with new guidance on consent to make clear that patients must have sufficient information on any proposed procedure before their consent to treatment is sought.

From: The Thirlwall Inquiry: Review of Implementation of Recommendations from Previous Inquiries into Healthcare Issues (version dated April 2025)

Site note: The Thirlwall Inquiry legal team's own notes on implementation, from its Review of Implementation of Recommendations from Previous Inquiries into Healthcare Issues (version dated April 2025, published 27 February 2026). The review does not colour its Extent of Implementation cell for this recommendation green; it leaves the cell uncoloured where a recommendation was rejected, where evidence of implementation was insufficient, or where steps had been taken but implementation was not yet complete. Table row: section 6.2 No. 12, PDF page 75.

Earlier findings (1)

●Thirlwall Inquiry legal team · 15 May 2024

The Government agreed with this recommendation.

In its January 2002 response, the Department of Health said that the steps outlined in response to recommendations 1 to 11 would help ensure patients have access to information while receiving care, with new guidance on consent to make clear that patients must have sufficient information on any proposed procedure before their consent to treatment is sought.

From: The Thirlwall Inquiry: Review of Implementation of Recommendations from Previous Inquiries into Healthcare Issues (version of 15 May 2024)

Site note: The Thirlwall Inquiry legal team's own notes on implementation, from its Review of Implementation of Recommendations from Previous Inquiries into Healthcare Issues (version of 15 May 2024). The review does not colour its Extent of Implementation cell for this recommendation green; it leaves the cell uncoloured where a recommendation was rejected, where evidence of implementation was insufficient, or where steps had been taken but implementation was not yet complete. Table row: section 6.2 No. 12, PDF page 76.

How this page is built

The recommendation and the government responses are verbatim from primary documents. Delivery statements and other bodies' findings are shown in their own words, each with its source. The summary is written by this site and labelled as such. The Index does not paraphrase sources or characterise intent; it records what has been published.