Moral distress and professional freedom of speech among doctors.

BACKGROUND Previous studies indicate that Norwegian doctors experience distress in their encounter with differing and partly contradictory ideals, such as the obligation to criticise unethical and inappropriate practices. The objective of this study was to investigate the perception of moral distress and professional freedom of speech among Norwegian doctors as of today, as well as identify changes that have occurred since the previous study undertaken in 2004. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 1,522 economically active doctors received a questionnaire listing various statements describing the perception of moral distress and professional freedom of speech. The responses were compared to responses to the 2004 study. RESULTS Altogether 67% of the doctors responded to the questionnaire. The proportion who reported «fairly strong» or «strong» moral distress varied from 24% to 70% among the different statements. On the whole, the «rank and file» hospital doctors reported the highest degree of moral distress. Nevertheless, a decrease in the scores for moral distress could be observed from 2004 to 2010. During the same period, the perception of professional freedom of speech increased slightly. INTERPRETATION A reduced level of distress associated with ethical conflicts in working life may be due to improved methods for handling distressing situations, or because the consequences of the health services reorganisations are perceived as less threatening now than in 2004, immediately after the introduction of the hospital reform. However, the perceived lower distress level may also be due to professional and ethical resignation. These findings should be followed up by a qualitative study.