Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Priority setting in cardiac surgery: a survey of decision making and ethical issues
  1. L Ridderstolpe1,
  2. G Collste2,
  3. H Rutberg3,
  4. H Åhlfeldt1
  1. 1Department of Biomedical Engineering/Medical Informatics, Linköping University, Sweden
  2. 2Centre for Applied Ethics, Linköping University, Sweden
  3. 3Linköping Heart Center, University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden
  1. Correspondence to:
 Hans Åhlfeldt
 PhD, Linköping University Department of Biomedical Engineering/Medical Informatics University Hospital S-581 85 Linköping Sweden; Hans.Ahlfeldt{at}


Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine priority setting for coronary artery bypass surgery, and to provide an overview of decisions and rationales used in clinical practice.

Method: Questionnaires were sent to all permanently employed cardiologists, cardiothoracic surgeons, and anaesthesiologists at nine Swedish hospitals performing adult cardiothoracic surgery.

Results: A total of 208 physicians responded (a 44% return rate). There was considerable agreement concerning the criteria that should be used to set priorities for coronary artery bypass interventions (clusters of factors in synthesis). However, there was a lack of accord regarding the use of national guidelines for priority setting and risk indexes.

Conclusions: Basic training and the strong support of ethical principles in priority setting are lacking. The respondents indicated a need for clearer guidelines and an open dialogue or discussion. The lack of generally acknowledged plans and guidelines for priority setting may result in unequal, conditional, and unfair treatment.

  • clinical guidelines
  • decision making
  • ethical principles
  • evidence based medicine
  • priority setting, risk index

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • This study was supported by grant no. F2001-320 from FORSS (The Research Council of South-eastern Sweden) in Linköping, a grant from SSF (Swedish Nurses Association) in Stockholm, and a grant from the Swedish Federation of County Councils.

  • There was no conflict of interest in this study.

  • Approval for the study was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the University Hospital in Linköping.