[DavidVoid]

That policy is precautionary to give doctors guidance on how to prioritize patients if/when the hospitals run out of space/resources.

To my knowledge, these decisions have not had to be made yet. As mentioned in [3] Stockholm has space over and is accepting patients from the Sörmland region.

[Yetanfou]

> To my knowledge, these decisions have not had to be made yet.

According to people working in health care in Stockholm they have used these policies for a few weeks now [1], the article (from the 2nd of April, 2½ weeks ago) contains two references to cases where patients were denied intensive care (and, as a consequence, died) who would have received care before these policies were enacted. The (anonymous) nurse states that Sjukvården är inte öppet ärlig med att vi redan har en katastrofsjukvård där man inte prioriterar de som man bedömer är sjukast, utan de som man bedömer har störst chans att rädda which (loosely) translates to care givers are not open about the fact that we already optimise for throughput instead of prioritising those who need the most care

[1] https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/9v4z2q/sjukskoterska-vi...

[mediascreen]

The article is almost three weeks old. The anonymous nurse predicts the imminent total collapse of the health care system where even the field hospitals will overflow and it's too late to do anything about it. This has clearly not happened.

The nurse goes on to blame deregulations and financial aid to banks and corporations. This seems more like the personal feeling of a rather leftist nurse published by a left of center tabloid.

I am sure there have been misinterpretations of the directives and there have probably been times where prioritizations have been done based on local and short term conditions. But it is not an active and commonly used policy.