Selecting patients when resources are limited: a study of US medical directors of kidney dialysis and transplantation facilities.

Abstract

This study reports and discusses responses of 453 medical directors of renal dialysis and transplantation facilities to detailed patient selection questionnaires. The questionnaires examine selection criteria being used today as well as those which would be employed were resources to remain or become scarce relative to need. Selection criteria examined (and the number of directors supporting them when resources are limited) are: qualitative prognosis, psychological stability, likelihood of medical benefit, quantitative prognosis, medical benefit (virtually all); willingness, age (very large majority); unique moral duties, disproportionate resources, environment, progress of science, social value (majority); ability to pay, random selection, constituency (very large minority); sex (virtually none). Qualitative prognosis, quantitative prognosis, medical benefit, ability to pay, and especially age are the criteria employed today whose influence would increase if resources are further limited. Some of the ethical implications of various criteria are discussed.