Skip to main content

Table 2 Responses regarding whether neurosurgery should be performed

From: Withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment: a comparative study of the ethical reasoning of physicians and the general public

Argument

Doctors/public

Percentage (CI)

Priority (%)

Surgery should be performed because it is the first task of health care to safe lives

Doctors

Public

12.9 (9.0–16.8)

78.3 (74.7–81.9)

4.5%

29.8%

A neurosurgeon refers to experience from a successful case two years ago; thus the surgery should be performed

Doctors

Public

25.0 (20.0–30.0)

80.8 (77.3–84.3)

11.1%

23.6%

Surgery should be performed because otherwise it might be interpreted as a kind of euthanasia

Doctors

Public

5.6 (2.9–8.3)

55.4 (51.0–59.8)

1.2%

2.5%

Surgery should be performed because the son has asked the doctor to do anything to save his mother's life

Doctors

Public

8.7 (5.4–12.0)

58.9 (54.5–63.3)

0.5%

3.9%

Surgery should be avoided since the patient's quality of life would be greatly reduced

Doctors

Public

82.8 (78.5–87.1)

40.6 (36.3–44.9)

61.5%

12.5%

Surgery should be avoided due to the age of the patient

Doctors

Public

18.8 (14.3–23.3)

18.2 (14.8–21.6)

1.6%

2.8%

Surgery should be avoided due to the cost and the uncertain result

Doctors

Public

15.8 (11.6–20.0)

15.7 (12.5–18.9)

0.8%

2.3%

Surgery should be avoided due to the patient's wish not to end up in a persistent vegetative state

Doctors

Public

71.6 (66.3–76.9)

54.5 (50.1–58.9)

18.4%

22.6%

  1. This table shows the response pattern of the doctors and members of the general public who answered the question regrding whether neurosurgery should be performed in a formerly healthy 72-year-old patient suffering from a major haemorrhage in the left central part of the brain. The results are presented as proportions of those who agreed 'mostly' or 'entirely', with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The percentages of those who considered the argument to be the most important are also presented