Informed consent is the legal and ethical foundation of every medical measure. For physicians, specialists and legal professionals in the Austrian healthcare system, it is not only a legal duty but an essential part of patient-centred care.

Under § 252 of the Austrian General Civil Code (ABGB), medical treatment may be carried out only with the patient’s consent. Consent is only valid if it follows comprehensible and complete information. Treatment without such consent is in principle unlawful – even if it was medically indicated.

This means that responsibility for implementing informed consent correctly lies entirely with the medical staff. This article gives an in-depth overview of the current legal framework in Austria, operational requirements in practice and common pitfalls in everyday clinical work. A comparison with Germany and an assessment of digital solutions such as medudoc can be found in the main article on informed consent in Germany and Austria.

Sections 252–255 of the Austrian General Civil Code (ABGB) set out the requirements for the medical treatment of adults. The key provisions:

  • § 252 ABGB: Only adults with decision-making capacity can give consent on their own.
  • § 253 ABGB: If decision-making capacity is lacking, the consent of a holder of a lasting power of attorney or an adult representative is required – unless a binding advance directive exists.
  • § 173 ABGB: Children and adolescents can give consent if they have the capacity to understand and judge. For serious procedures, the consent of the parents (persons with parental responsibility) is also required.

The Austrian Advance Directives Act (PatVG) plays a central role. It distinguishes between:

  • Binding advance directive: in writing, after information by a physician, legally binding on the physician.
  • Advance directive to be taken into account: without formal requirements, but it must be taken into account.

For inpatient care in Austrian hospitals, § 8 of the Austrian Federal Hospitals Act (KAKuG) also applies. As a federal framework law, the KAKuG obliges hospital operators to ensure through suitable organisational measures that patient information and consent are compliant, complete and traceable. For hospitals and tertiary care centres, § 8 KAKuG is therefore, alongside the ABGB, the legal basis of most direct practical relevance.

The case law of the Austrian Supreme Court (OGH) continuously clarifies the statutory minimum requirements. The OGH applies a strict standard to risk disclosure in particular: even statistically rare complications must be disclosed if their occurrence would have serious consequences for the patient. In practice, this means that the requirements for documentation quality and individualised patient information in inpatient facilities often exceed what the wording of the law alone demands.

The duty to inform itself follows from the treatment contract and the case law of the OGH. For hospitals, § 5a(1) no. 2 KAKuG and the Patientencharta (Patients’ Charter, an agreement under Art. 15a B-VG) also establish it as a patient right.

In addition, there is the physician’s duty to document under § 51 of the Austrian Physicians Act (ÄrzteG) and, in hospitals, § 10(1) no. 2 lit. a KAKuG, which expressly lists the patient information as part of the medical record. This results in a clear legal framework: no procedure may take place without legally valid consent, and that consent must be properly documented.

Content of the patient information

Before a patient can give legally valid consent, medical staff must inform them about the following:

  • nature and aim of the treatment
  • possible risks and complications
  • alternatives to the proposed measure
  • prospects of success and prognosis
  • consequences of not treating

This information must be conveyed orally, comprehensibly and in good time. Consent sheets, videos or information material may be used – but they do not replace the personal discussion.

Form and documentation

Consent is ideally given in writing, especially for invasive or high-risk procedures. What matters, however, is that the patient has understood the content and consents voluntarily to the procedure.

In hospitals, § 10(1) no. 2 lit. a KAKuG requires the patient information to be documented in the medical record; the general duty to document follows from § 51 ÄrzteG. Patient information and consent should be documented completely and traceably. In practice, this means recording:

  • date, time and content of the discussion
  • name of the physician who provided the information
  • the patient’s signature (digital or on paper)
  • any special circumstances (language barriers, questions, refusal)

If the patient waives the information, this must also be documented. A waiver does not release the physician from the duty to point out material risks if the waiver is not absolute.

Common challenges in everyday clinical practice

Whether in outpatient care, in hospital or in telemedical services, the following sources of error come up again and again:

  • Time pressure: shortened consent discussions or merely handing over a form are legally insufficient.
  • Language barriers: patient information without a qualified interpreter can render consent invalid.
  • Standardisation without individualisation: a generic sheet without reference to the specific patient situation is not enough.
  • Missing documentation: without an entry in the medical record, consent cannot be proven in the event of a liability claim.
  • Insufficient involvement of minors or representatives: the legal rights of representation must be observed exactly.
  • AI-assisted diagnostics and the EU AI Act: since August 2, 2026, the transparency obligations under Art. 50 of the EU AI Act have applied, chiefly a notice when people interact directly with AI, such as chatbots, and the labelling of AI-generated content. Under the AI Omnibus (Regulation (EU) 2026/1744), the obligations for high-risk AI in medical devices (Art. 6(1), Annex I) only apply from August 2, 2028. The AI Act contains no general duty to tell patients that AI is used in diagnostics. In our assessment, however, such a duty can follow from the physician’s duty to inform if the use of AI is material to the decision – for example in radiology or pathology.

The complexity of modern medicine and scarce hospital resources make structured, digital patient education increasingly relevant. Solutions such as medudoc offer:

  • video-based patient education based on medical guidelines
  • individual adaptation to indication, language and risk profile
  • digital signatures (including remote signature) with audit-proof storage
  • structured documentation in line with the ABGB, ÄrzteG and GDPR

Benefit for medical staff: In a prospective study at University Hospital Würzburg, the median physician discussion time before cholecystectomy fell by 81% with video-assisted patient education — patient understanding and satisfaction remained high. In addition, patients understand more, and all documents are filed in a legally sound way — regardless of whether the consent discussion takes place on site or via telemedicine. [View the study]

For a complete overview of integrating digital tools into legally sound patient education:
Read the analysis: digital patient education and informed consent (Germany and Austria)

Conclusion

Informed consent in Austria is a clearly structured, legally binding process – not a formality. Medical staff are responsible for enabling patients to make decisions based on valid information. As requirements grow, digital tools such as medudoc offer the opportunity to map this process efficiently, in a standardised way and in a legally sound manner.