HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Martin, D K Articles by Bernstein, M Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Martin, D K Articles by Bernstein, M

Access to intensive care unit beds for neurosurgery patients: a qualitative case study

¹ Department of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Canada
² Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto
³ Department of Medicine, University of Toronto
⁴ Division of Neurosurgery, Toronto Western Hospital and Department of Surgery, University of Toronto

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Dr D K Martin, University of Toronto Joint Centre for Bioethics, 88 College Street, Toronto, Canada ON M5G 1L4;
douglas.martin{at}utoronto.ca

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to describe the process used to decide which patients are admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) at a hospital with special focus on access for neurosurgery patients, and evaluate it using "accountability for reasonableness".

Methods: Qualitative case study methodology was used. Data were collected from documents, interviews with key informants, and observations. The data were subjected to thematic analysis and evaluated using the four conditions of "accountability for reasonableness" (relevance, publicity, appeals, enforcement) to identify good practices and opportunities for improvement.

Results: ICU admissions were based on the referring physician’s assessment of the medical need of the patient for an ICU bed. Non-medical criteria (for example, family wishes) also influenced admission decisions. Although there was an ICU bed allocation policy, patient need always superceded the bed allocation policy. ICU admission guidelines were not used. Admission decisions and reasons were disseminated to the ICU charge nurse, the bed coordinator, the ICU resident, the intensivist, and the requesting physician/surgeon by word of mouth and by written documentation in the patient’s chart, but not to the patient or family. Appeals occurred informally, through negotiations between clinicians. Enforcement of relevance, publicity, and appeals was felt to be either non-existent or deficient.

Conclusions: Conducting a case study of priority setting decisions for patients requiring ICU beds, with a special focus on neurosurgical patients, and applying the ethical framework "accountability for reasonableness" can help critical care units improve the fairness of their priority setting.

Keywords: priority setting; critical care; neurosurgery

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. Reeleder, V. Goel, P. A. Singer, and D. K. Martin Accountability Agreements in Ontario Hospitals: Are They Fair? J. Public Adm. Res. Theory., January 1, 2008; 18(1): 161 - 175. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Kapiriri and D. K. Martin Bedside Rationing by Health Practitioners: A Case Study in a Ugandan Hospital Med Decis Making, January 1, 2007; 27(1): 44 - 52. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Giannini and D. Consonni Physicians' perceptions and attitudes regarding inappropriate admissions and resource allocation in the intensive care setting Br. J. Anaesth., January 1, 2006; 96(1): 57 - 62. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S R Benatar Priority setting: learning to make tough decisions J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, September 1, 2003; 74(9): 1185 - 1186. [Full Text] [PDF]