In any health care system where funds are limited, priorities must be set. Resource allocation, also called priority setting or rationing, may determine who receives treatment, what treatment they receive, or amount of time spent with professionals. Bedside rationing decisions are those which health care professionals make at the clinical level. Ethical distress and residue theory may inform the investigation of discomfort and conflict identified in physicians who ration care. Ethical distress is experienced when external constraints make it nearly impossible to do “the right thing,” and ethical residue represents the traces which remain following unresolved ethical distress. This study aims to explore how physicians negotiate ethical residue associated with making bedside rationing decisions on an ongoing basis, using a grounded theory methodology. The findings indicate that “doing everything I think patients need” is central to this process. Findings may inform medical ethics education and training interventions for practicing physicians
