Abstract

The use of public opinion data is not new, nor are discussions and speculations about value issues in health care. This study examines the opinions of physicians and public respondents in Colorado on value issues in critical care medicine to determine if differences exist. This study uses opinion data from two separate surveys conducted in Colorado. Eighteen similar question-statements were used to obtain data on these value issue. The question-statements were grouped for the purpose of analysis around the values of autonomy, beneficence, equity, access and allocation of resources as well as issues of organ transplants and imperiled newborns. ;The primary assumption of this study is that the opinions on these values and issues will differ because of the educational and professional experiences of a physician impact values. The findings of this study indicate that differences in public and physician opinion exist in the areas of autonomy, beneficence, equity, access and organ transplants. Public and physicians respondents agreed on the issues surrounding imperiled newborns and the allocation of critical care medicine