Case-Based Clinical Ethics Support – A Description and Normative Discussion of Methodological Issues from the Swedish Perspective

Clinical Ethics Support (CES) includes various forms of systematic support to deal with ethical challenges in healthcare and case-based CES (C-CES) is used for CES in particular cases. The aim was to describe and normatively discuss organizational and methodological aspects of C-CES used in Swedish healthcare. A mixed-methods approach was used. A descriptive survey was answered regarding eight organizations on hospital, regional and national level, with large variations in the number of conducted C-CES activities. Data were compiled and frequencies calculated. Based on the survey results, normative questions were formulated. Six participants, with expertise of C-CES, participated in a normative group discussion. Field notes and transcribed data were analysed qualitatively. The top ranked goal of C-CES was "Supporting decision making". Mainly prospective cases were used and C-CES was carried out as un-planned and pre-planned sessions. The normative results showed the importance of avoiding making C-CES unattractive to clinicians, for instance by keeping the time frame. The professional backgrounds of C-CES leaders varied greatly and arguments were provided for the facilitating role and that C-CES leaders ought not facilitate where they have been clinically engaged. Identified challenges included variations in uptake of C-CES activities that do not mirror the ethical challenges of the context. The unfair uptake of C-CES can be compared with the uptake in Norway where there are legal requirements for CES. In this study patients and families were not reported to request or attend C-CES. Thus, further research and interventions are needed to ensure their representation in Swedish C-CES.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
HEC Forum
Published
2025-10-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10730-025-09566-5
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Ethics in medical practice
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.63

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Case-Based Clinical Ethics Support – A Description and Normative Discussion of Methodological Issues from the Swedish Perspective

Joar Björk, Cecilia Bartholdson, Pernilla Pergert, Mia Svantesson et al.
2 citations
HEC Forum
Ethics in medical practice
5.63
article

Case-Based Clinical Ethics Support – A Description and Normative Discussion of Methodological Issues from the Swedish Perspective

Joar Björk, Cecilia Bartholdson, Pernilla Pergert, Mia Svantesson, Catarina Fischer Grönlund, Margareta Brännström, Anders Bremer, Niklas Juth
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Clinical Ethics Support (CES) includes various forms of systematic support to deal with ethical challenges in healthcare and case-based CES (C-CES) is used for CES in particular cases. The aim was to describe and normatively discuss organizational and methodological aspects of C-CES used in Swedish healthcare. A mixed-methods approach was used. A descriptive survey was answered regarding eight organizations on hospital, regional and national level, with large variations in the number of conducted C-CES activities. Data were compiled and frequencies calculated. Based on the survey results, normative questions were formulated. Six participants, with expertise of C-CES, participated in a normative group discussion. Field notes and transcribed data were analysed qualitatively. The top ranked goal of C-CES was "Supporting decision making". Mainly prospective cases were used and C-CES was carried out as un-planned and pre-planned sessions. The normative results showed the importance of avoiding making C-CES unattractive to clinicians, for instance by keeping the time frame. The professional backgrounds of C-CES leaders varied greatly and arguments were provided for the facilitating role and that C-CES leaders ought not facilitate where they have been clinically engaged. Identified challenges included variations in uptake of C-CES activities that do not mirror the ethical challenges of the context. The unfair uptake of C-CES can be compared with the uptake in Norway where there are legal requirements for CES. In this study patients and families were not reported to request or attend C-CES. Thus, further research and interventions are needed to ensure their representation in Swedish C-CES.

HEC Forum
Uppsala University (SE), Linnaeus University (SE), Örebro University (SE), Karolinska Institutet (SE), Sachs' Children and Youth Hospital (SE), Umeå University (SE)
Uppsala Universitet
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Ethics in medical practice
5.63
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.