Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jul 1;11(7):1148-1157.
doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2021.16. Epub 2021 Mar 15.

Clinical Priority Setting and Decision-Making in Sweden: A Cross-sectional Survey Among Physicians

Catharina Drees  1 , Barbro Krevers  2   3 , Niklas Ekerstad  2   3   4 , Annette Rogge  1 , Christoph Borzikowsky  5 , Stuart McLennan  6   7 , Alena M Buyx  6
Affiliations

Clinical Priority Setting and Decision-Making in Sweden: A Cross-sectional Survey Among Physicians

Catharina Drees et al. Int J Health Policy Manag. .

Abstract

Background: Priority setting in healthcare that aims to achieve a fair and efficient allocation of limited resources is a worldwide challenge. Sweden has developed a sophisticated approach. Still, there is a need for a more detailed insight on how measures permeate clinical life. This study aimed to assess physicians' views regarding (1) impact of scarce resources on patient care, (2) clinical decision-making, and (3) the ethical platform and national guidelines for healthcare by the National Board of Health and Welfare (NBHW).

Methods: An online cross-sectional questionnaire was sent to two groups in Sweden, 2016 and 2017. Group 1 represented 331 physicians from different departments at one University hospital and group 2 consisted of 923 members of the Society of Cardiology.

Results: Overall, a 26% (328/1254) response rate was achieved, 49% in group 1 (162/331), 18% in group 2 (166/923). Scarcity of resources was perceived by 59% more often than 'at least once per month,' whilst 60% felt less than 'well-prepared' to address this issue. Guidelines in general had a lot of influence and 19% perceived them as limiting decision-making. 86% professed to be mostly independent in decision-making. 36% knew the ethical platform 'well' and 'very well' and 64% NBHW's national guidelines. 57% expressed a wish for further knowledge and training regarding the ethical platform and 51% for support in applying NBHW's national guidelines.

Conclusion: There was a need for more support to deal with scarcity of resources and for increased knowledge about the ethical platform and NBHW's national guidelines. Independence in clinical decision-making was perceived as high and guidelines in general as important. Priority setting as one potential pathway to fair and transparent decision-making should be highlighted more in Swedish clinical settings, with special emphasis on the ethical platform.

Keywords: Decision-Making; Fair Allocation; National Guidelines; Physician; Priority Setting; Sweden.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 3
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. UN. 74/2. Political Declaration of the High-level Meeting on Universal Health Coverage. United Nations General Assembly; 2019.
    1. World Health Organization (WHO). Together on the Road to Universal Health Coverage: A Call to Action. Geneva: WHO; 2017.
    1. World Health Organization (WHO). Global Spending on Health: A World in Transition. Geneva: WHO; 2019.
    1. Ethikrat D. Nutzen und Kosten im Gesundheitswesen: Zur normativen Funktion ihrer Bewertung, Stellungnahme. 2011.
    1. World Health Organization (WHO). Introduction: Innovative Governance Strategies in European Public Hospitals. Copenhagen: WHO, on behalf of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies; 2011.