Every dentist that has appeared before the board would say in retrospect that they would have taken more time to help a patient understand the limitations and difficulties of a new denture. It is far better to have the patient make an informed choice for alternative treatment to a conventional denture than to have deal with a denture complaint at the end. The patient will be very well prepared for the realities of adapting and functioning with a new denture. The patient will decide that an alternate treatment is more preferable. The patient will refuse treatment in your office because their expectations exceed your realistic ability to deliver the service.
All outcomes are positive.
The primary benefit of informed consent is to provide a structured communication so that a patient may fully understand proposed treatment. A secondary reason to execute informed consent is to protect the provider in case of subsequent disagreement by providing documentation and rebuttal to a malpractice claim or complaint to a state dental board. Anyone who is able to answer the patient's questions may conduct an informed consent discussion. The doctor can conduct the discussion. However, it is my experience that the doctor's time constraints make it difficult to conduct a proper discussion every time.