IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0235509.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The first nationwide study on facing and solving ethical dilemmas among healthcare professionals in Slovenia

Author

Listed:
  • Štefan Grosek
  • Rok Kučan
  • Jon Grošelj
  • Miha Oražem
  • Urh Grošelj
  • Vanja Erčulj
  • Jaro Lajovic
  • Ana Borovečki
  • Blaž Ivanc

Abstract

Background: Healthcare professionals (HCPs), patients and families are often faced with ethical dilemmas. The role of healthcare ethics committees (HECs) is to offer support in these situations. Aim: The primary objective was to study how often HCPs encounter ethical dilemmas. The secondary objective was to identify the main types of ethical dilemmas encountered and how HCPs solve them. Subjects and methods: We conducted a cross-sectional, survey-based study among HCPs in 14 Slovenian hospitals. A questionnaire was designed and validated by HCPs who were selected by proportional stratified sampling. Data collection took place between April 2015 and April 2016. Results: The final sample size was n = 485 (385 or 79.4%, female). The response rates for HCPs working in secondary and tertiary level institutions were 45% and 51%, respectively. Three hundred and forty (70.4%) of 485 HCPs (very) frequently encountered ethical dilemmas. Frequent ethical dilemmas were waiting periods for diagnostics or treatment, suboptimal working conditions due to poor interpersonal relations on the ward, preserving patients’ dignity, and relations between HCPs and patients. Physicians and nurses working in secondary level institutions, compared to their colleagues working in tertiary level institutions, more frequently encountered ethical dilemmas with respect to preserving patients’ dignity, protecting patients’ information, and relations between HCPs and patients. In terms of solutions, all HCPs most frequently discussed ethical dilemmas with co-workers (colleagues), and with the head of the department. According to HCPs, the most important role of HECs is staff education, followed by improving communication, and reviewing difficult ethical cases. Conclusions: Waiting periods for diagnostics and treatment and suboptimal working conditions due to poor interpersonal relations are considered to be among the most important ethical issues by HCPs in Slovenian hospitals. The most important role of HECs is staff education, improving communication, and reviewing difficult ethical cases.

Suggested Citation

  • Štefan Grosek & Rok Kučan & Jon Grošelj & Miha Oražem & Urh Grošelj & Vanja Erčulj & Jaro Lajovic & Ana Borovečki & Blaž Ivanc, 2020. "The first nationwide study on facing and solving ethical dilemmas among healthcare professionals in Slovenia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-20, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0235509
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235509
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0235509
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0235509&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0235509?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0235509. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.