Should a patient's socioeconomic status count in decisions about treatment in medical care? A longitudinal study of Norwegian doctors.

AIMS: The major causes of social inequalities in health are found outside of healthcare. However, healthcare can also play a role in maintaining, reducing, or reinforcing inequality. We present and discuss results from a panel study of doctors' views on whether and how socioeconomic factors should play a role in clinical decision making. METHODS: The panel comprised a representative sample of Norwegian doctors, established in 1994. For the current study, the doctors received postal questionnaires in 2008, 2012 and 2016. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, factor analysis and mixed models for repeated measurements. RESULTS: The sample sizes were 1072 (65%), 1279 (71%) and 1605 (73%), respectively. The doctors were increasingly positive towards considering socioeconomic factors, and reported giving more time and advice and asking for less pay to compensate for unfavorable socioeconomic factors. General practitioners were more likely to consider socioeconomic factors and changed their practice accordingly compared to other clinicians. The percentage of doctors who agreed that different amounts of resources should be used to obtain similar health effects was high and increased over time. CONCLUSIONS: Increasingly more doctors are willing to consider patients' socioeconomic factors in clinical care. This could be contrary to professional ethics, in which only medical need should count. However, it depends on how 'need' is interpreted. As treatment outcomes partly depend on non-medical factors, socioeconomic factors should be considered because they influence patients' ability to benefit from medical care. Equality requires mitigating factors with negative impacts on health outcomes.

How hospital top managers reason about the central leadership task of balancing quality of patient care, economy and professionals' engagement: an interview study.

PURPOSE: This study aims to deepen the understanding of how top managers reason about handling the relationships between quality of patient care, economy and professionals' engagement. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Qualitative design. Individual in-depth interviews with all members of the executive management team at an emergency hospital in Norway were analysed using reflexive thematic method. FINDINGS: The top managers had the intention to balance between quality of patient care, economy and professionals' engagement. This became increasingly difficult in times of high internal or external pressures. Then top management acted as if economy was the most important focus. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: For health-care top managers to lead the pursuit towards increased sustainability in health care, there is a need to balance between quality of patient care, economy and professionals' engagement. This study shows that this balancing act is not an anomaly top-managers can eradicate. Instead, they need to recognize, accept and deliberately act with that in mind, which can create virtuous development spirals where managers and health-professional communicate and collaborate, benefitting quality of patient care, economy and professionals' engagement. However, this study builds on a limited number of participants. More research is needed. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: Sustainable health care needs to balance quality of patient care and economy while at the same time ensure professionals' engagement. Even though this is a central leadership task for managers at all levels, there is limited knowledge about how top managers reason about this.