Turf wars: the ethics of professional territorialism

Abstract

A 300-bed general hospital in a mid-sized city has a busy cardiac catheterization laboratory, with 12 invasive cardiologists and more than 4000 annual procedures. An invasive radiology suite, the only one in town, is staffed by a single invasive radiologist and two vascular surgeons. They perform about 150 diagnostic angiograms and endovascular procedures each year, about half of which are generated by consultation requests from the cardiologists. The invasive radiology team has worked together for the last 5 years, since an endovascular fellowship-trained vascular surgeon joined the staff. The invasive radiologist helped to develop an endovascular team and mentored the more senior vascular surgeon until he could accumulate the requisite number of procedures to become credentialed. The program's finances and work schedule have been arranged to the satisfaction of all three participants. Until recently, whenever cardiologists found evidence of vascular occlusive disease during catheterizations, they changed host arteries; if symptoms and signs indicated a need for therapy, they referred patients to the invasive radiology clinic. Lately, the cardiologists have begun to perform terminal angiograms on all their patients to detect injuries. They have requested clinical privileges to perform peripheral endovascular procedures as well as traditional cardiac work. The hospital administrator is fearful that the cardiologists may leave the hospital if their request is denied. The invasive radiology staff are concerned that the caseload is insufficient to maintain quality if they must divide it with the cardiologists. You are the hospital Chief of Staff and must decide whether to grant the cardiologists privileges which have thus far been reserved to the endovascular team. What should you do?