It depends on why the desired outcome did not happen. Treatments or procedures that result in unexpected and undesirable outcomes do not necessarily mean medical malpractice. Doctors are required to have the knowledge and skills to care for a patient, but they cannot reasonably guarantee their services. If the doctor followed the standard of care but did not achieve the desired outcome, then it may not be malpractice. Also, if something could have gone wrong, but there was no harm caused, there is no valid medical malpractice case. But if the doctor deviated from the standard of care and the outcome caused the patient harm, it could be malpractice. Generally, patients are informed of the possibility of improvement and the risks and give informed consent to procedures. The patient should understand the purpose, benefits, and risks of the treatment. The medical professional also tells them about other alternatives the patient has, in addition to the proposed treatment. The patient has the right to make a knowing and voluntary decision about their medical treatment before giving the doctor permission to treat them medically for a specific illness or condition. However, even if a patient signs a consent form, the doctor still has a responsibility to meet the standard of care and is liable for mistakes caused by negligence that harmed them.