Abstract
Background The scarcity of resources represents ethical challenges and involves moral distress for health professionals. There are no longitudinal studies of moral distress among representative samples of physicians.
Method Surveys of the Norwegian Physician Panel (NPP) compared the extent of moral distress in 2004 and 2021. Descriptive statistics and regression analysis were used in the study.
Results Response rates were 67% (1004/1499) in 2004 and 70% (1639/2316) in 2021. That patient care is deprived due to time constraints is the most severe dimension of moral distress among physicians, and it has increased comparing 2021 with 2004 (68.3% in 2004 to 75.1% in 2021 reported “somewhat” or “very morally distressing”). Moral distress also increased concerning patients who “cry the loudest” get better and faster treatment than others. Moral distress was reduced on statements about long waiting times, treatment not provided due to economic limitations, deprioritisation of older patients, and acting against one’s conscience. Women reported higher moral distress than men in both years, and there were significant gender differences for six statements in 2021 and one in 2004. Though not consistently, the physicians’ age and workplace influenced the reported moral distress.
Conclusion In both years, moral distress among physicians related to scarcity of or unfair distribution of resources was high. Moral distress associated with resource scarcity and acting against one’s conscience decreased, which might indicate improvements in the healthcare system. On the other hand, it might suggest that physicians have reduced their ideals or expectations or are morally fatigued.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Norwegian Centre for Research Data (SIKT) approves the survey and is exempt from the obligation to submit it to the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics (IRB 0000 1870).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
