Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Qualitative Research Survey on Cardiologist’s Ethical Stance in Cases of Moral Dilemmas in Cardiology Clinics

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Health Care Analysis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study sought to determine cardiologists’ degrees of ethical awareness and preferred courses of action for ethical dilemmas frequently encountered in clinical settings. For this evaluation, an online survey was created and sent to cardiologists affiliated with various academic posts in Ankara, Turkey. The survey included ten cases with various ethical considerations selected from our book, “Clinic Ethics with Cases from Cardiology.” Four possible action choices were defined for each case. Participants were asked to choose one or more of these preferences. In addition, a fictional change was made in each case’s context without changing the original ethical issue, and participants were asked whether an attitude different from the first chosen one was preferred. The participation ratio was 49/185 (26%), consent ratio 47/185 (25,4%), and completion ratio 44/185 (23,7%). Nine of the ten scenario changes did not change participants’ preferred action. For most questions, action preferences were concentrated between the two options. Although legal regulations did not reduce ethical dilemmas, they clarified physicians’ action preferences. Similarly, as an obscure moral issue gained prominence, physicians were forced to draw clearer lines in their actions. External factors such as healthcare emergencies can change physicians’ ethical dilemma-solving attitudes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kadıoğlu, F. G., Can, R., Okuyaz, S., Yalçın, S., & Kadıoğlu, N. S. (2011). Physicians’ attitudes toward clinical ethics consultation: A research study from Turkey. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, 41(6), 1081–1090.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Demir, M., & Büken, Ö. N. (2016). Proposal for a hospital ethics committee at the Hacettepe University Hospital, Turkey: A mixed method study. Acta Medica Anatolia, 4(1), 21–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Hurst, S. A., Perrier, A., Pegoraro, R., et al. (2007). Ethical difficulties in clinical practice: Experiences of European doctors. Journal of Medical Ethics, 33(1), 51–57. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2005.014266.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Ekmekci, P. E., Buruk, B., Celebi, A. S., et al. (2022). Clinical ethics with cases from cardiology. TOBB ETU Publications.

  5. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Health (RTMH). Activity Report. Retrieved October 15 (2022). from https://sgb.saglik.gov.tr/TR-87502/tc-saglik-bakanligi-2021-yili-faaliyet-raporu-yayinlanmistir.html.

  6. Boceta, R., Martínez-Casares, O., & Albert, M. (2021). The informed consent in the mature minor: Understanding and decision-making capacity. Anales De Pediatria (Engl Ed), 95(6), 413–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anpede.2020.10.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Turkish Personal Data Protection Law. Law Number: 6698, acceptance Date: March 24, 2016. Retrieved November 10 (2023). from https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuat?MevzuatNo=6698&MevzuatTur=1&MevzuatTertip=5.

  8. Orr, R. D., & Genesen, L. B. (1998). Medicine, ethics and religion: Rational or irrational? Journal of Medical Ethics, 24(6), 385–387. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.24.6.385.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Barilan, Y. M. (2011). Respect for personal autonomy, human dignity, and the problems of self-directedness and botched autonomy. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 36(5), 496–515. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhr035.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sultan, H., Mansour, R., Shamieh, O., Al-Tabba’, A., & Al-Hussaini, M. (2021). DNR and COVID-19: The ethical dilemma and suggested solutions. Frontiers in Public Health, 9, 560405. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.560405.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Phelps, K., Regen, E., Oliver, D., McDermott, C., & Faull, C. (2017). Withdrawal of ventilation at the patient’s request in MND: A retrospective exploration of the ethical and legal issues that have arisen for doctors in the UK. BMJ Support and Palliative Care, 7(2), 189–196. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjspcare-2014-000826.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Pettersson, M., Hedström, M., & Höglund, A. T. (2020). The ethics of DNR decisions in oncology and hematology care: A qualitative study. BMC Medical Ethics, 21(1), 66. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00508-z.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Hasan, T. T., Seyed, B. M. S., Fallahi-Khoshknab, M., Ebadi, A., Mohammadi Shahboulaghi, F., & Gillespie, M. (2018). Respecting the privacy of hospitalized patients: An integrative review. Nursing Ethics, 969733018759832, https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733018759832.

  14. Kim, K., Han, Y., & Kim, J. S. (2017). Nurses’ and patients’ perceptions of privacy protection behaviors and information provision. Nursing Ethics, 24(5), 598–611. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733015622059.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Karimi, R., Nayeri, N., Daneshvari, Z., et al. (2009). Comparison of nurses and adolescents understanding of the importance of patient privacy and patient compliance. Hayat, 15, 21–30.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Akyüz, E., & Erdemir, F. (2013). Surgical patients’ and nurses’ opinions and expectations about privacy in care. Nursing Ethics, 20(6), 660–671. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733012468931.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Leonard, L. D., Cumbler, E., Schulick, R., & Tevis, S. E. (2021). From paternalistic to patient-centered: Strategies to support patients with the immediate release of medical records. The American Journal of Surgery, 222(5), 909–910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2021.04.018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Dreisinger, N., & Zapolsky, N. (2018). Complexities of consent: Ethics in the pediatric emergency department. Pediatric Emergency Care, 34(4), 288–290. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEC.0000000000001131.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Frank, C., Holmberg, M., Jernby, E. E., Hansen, A. S., & Bremer, A. (2022). Older patients’ autonomy when cared for at emergency departments. Nursing Ethics, 29(5), 1266–1279. https://doi.org/10.1177/09697330221105637.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of History of Medicine and Ethics, TOBB ETU Medical School, Sogutozu Street No: 43, Cankaya-Ankara, Turkey

    Banu Buruk & Perihan Elif Ekmekci

  2. Department of Cardiology, TOBB ETU Medical School, Cankaya-Ankara, Turkey

    Aksüyek Savaş Çelebi

  3. Emergency Department, Köyceğiz Public Hospital, Muğla, Turkey

    Begüm Güneş

Authors
  1. Banu Buruk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Perihan Elif Ekmekci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Aksüyek Savaş Çelebi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Begüm Güneş
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Banu Buruk.

Ethics declarations

Statements and Declarations

We know of no conflicts of interest associated with this publication, and there has been no financial support for this work. As the Corresponding Author, I confirm that the manuscript has been read and approved for submission by all the named authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Buruk, B., Ekmekci, P.E., Çelebi, A. et al. A Qualitative Research Survey on Cardiologist’s Ethical Stance in Cases of Moral Dilemmas in Cardiology Clinics. Health Care Anal (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-023-00476-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-023-00476-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation