Background Physicians face competing values of truth-telling and beneficence when deception may be employed in patient care. The purposes of this study were to assess resident physicians' attitudes towards lying, explore lie types and reported reasons for lying.
Method After obtaining institutional review board review (OSR# 58013) and receiving exempt status, posts written by Loma Linda University resident physicians in response to forum questions in required online courses were collected from 2002 to 2007. Responses were blinded and manually coded by two investigators using NVivo software. Qualitative and quantitative analyses of the data were performed with links to various attributes. A 95% binomial proportion CI was used to analyse the attribute data.
Results The study found that the majority of residents (90.3%) would disclose the truth about medical errors. Similarly, many residents (55.7%) would disclose the truth regarding unanticipated events, especially if the error was serious enough to result in a malpractice suit (74.7%). However, many residents (40.9%) would not reveal a near miss event because they believe it has no impact on patient health. Some residents (47.3%) would deceive the insurance company for additional patient benefits. Of those willing to lie, only a small group (4.2%) gave self-serving reasons.
Conclusions This study demonstrates that the ethical issues related to deception that trouble attending physicians also exist at the resident physician level. Residents primarily lie for altruistic reasons and rarely for egoistic or self-serving purposes that may or may not result in harm to patients, insurance companies and/or physicians themselves.
- Truth disclosure
Statistics from Altmetric.com
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.
Funding Funding was internal and provided by the GME Core Curriculum Program.
Competing interests None.
Ethics approval This study was conducted with the approval of the institutional review board, OSR# 58013.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Quality of care delivered by general internists in US hospitals who graduated from foreign versus US medical schools: observational study
- International medical graduates and quality of care
- Selecting an internationally diverse medical workforce
- Epidemiology of competence: a scoping review to understand the risks and supports to competence of four health professions
- Therapeutic privilege: between the ethics of lying and the practice of truth
- Minority report: how the UK’s treatment of foreign and ethnic minority doctors needs to change
- Association of clinical competence, specialty and physician country of origin with opioid prescribing for chronic pain: a cohort study
- Should non-disclosures be considered as morally equivalent to lies within the doctor–patient relationship?
- Expanding the US medical workforce: global perspectives and parallels
- Characteristics of resident physicians accessing a specialised mental health service: a retrospective study