A Path Analytic Model of Ethical Conflict in Practice and Autonomy in a Sample of Nurse Practitioners

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to test a causal model of ethical conflict in practice and autonomy in a sample of 254 nurse practitioners working in the primary care areas of family health, pediatrics, adult health and obstetrics/gynecology in the state of Maryland. A test of the model was conducted using a path analytic approach with LISREL 8.30 hypothesizing individual, organizational and societal/market factors influencing ethical conflict in practice and autonomy. Maximum likelihood estimation was used to estimate the parameters most likely to have generated the data. Forty-five percent of the total variance in ethical conflict was explained by the variables of ethical environment and ethical concern. Ethical concern, idealistic philosophy, ethics education in continuing education, percentage of client population enrolled in managed care, and market penetration explained 15% of the total variance in autonomy. The findings of this study indicate that the causal model of ethical conflict in practice and autonomy is consistent with the data and contributed to a fuller understanding of clinical decision making associated with practicing in a managed care environment. The final model supported a conceptual framework that is inclusive of three domains: individual, organizational and societal/market variables.

Keywords

context-sensitive theoretical frameworks ethics research nurse practitioners path analysis

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Hamric AB. Relationships between moral perspectives of care and justice, selected individual and contextual factors, and nurse activism in a sample of practicing nurses [Dissertation]. Baltimore, MD: University of Maryland, 1996.

Ketefian S. Moral reasoning and ethical practice in nursing: measurement issues . Nurs Clin North Am 1989; 24: 509-521 .

Killen AR. Morality in perioperative nurses: relationships among moral motivation, moral character, moral action, and nurse and patient outcomes [Dissertation]. Boston, MA: Boston College, 1998.

Penticuff JH. Conceptual issues in nursing research . J Med Philos 1991; 16: 235-238 .

Ulrich C , Soeken K , Miller N. Ethical conflict associated with managed care: views of nurse practitioners . Nurs Res 2003; 52: 168-175 .

Cassidy V. Ethical responsibilities in nursing: research findings and issues . J Prof Nurs 1991; 7: 112-118 .

Lützén K. Nursing ethics into the next millennium: a context-sensitive approach for nursing ethics . Nurs Ethics 1997; 4: 218-226 .

Aday LA , Begley CE , Lairson DR , Slater CH. Evaluating the healthcare system: effectiveness, efficiency, and equity, second edition. Chicago, IL: Health Administration Press , 1998.

Beauchamp TL , Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics, fourth edition. New York: Oxford University Press , 1994.

10.

Buchanan A. Principal/agent theory and decision-making in healthcare . Bioethics 1988; 2: 317-333 .

11.

Cooper TL. The responsible administrator, fourth edition. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass , 1998: 169-169.

12.

Pellegrino E.

Managed care at the bedside: how do we look in the moral mirror?

Kennedy Inst Ethics J 1997; 7: 321-330 .

13.

Ulrich C , Soeken K , Miller N. Predictors of autonomy in nurse practitioners: effects of organizational, ethical, and market characteristics . J Am Acad Nurs Pract 2003; 15: 319-327 .

14.

Asch DA , Jedrziewski K , Christakis NA. Response rates to mail surveys published in medical journals . J Clin Epidemiol 1997; 50: 1129-1136 .

15.

Dillman DA. Mail and telephone surveys. New York: Wiley , 1978.

16.

Dillman DA. Mail and internet surveys: the tailored design method, second edition. New York: Wiley , 2000.

17.

Trinkoff A , Storr C. Collecting substance use data with an anonymous mailed survey . Drug Alcohol Depend 1997; 48: 1-8 .

18.

Ferrell OC , Skinner SJ. Ethical behavior and bureaucratic structure in marketing research organizations . J Marketing Res 1988; 25: 103-109 .

19.

Fraedrich JP. The ethical behavior of retail managers . J Bus Ethics 1993; 12: 207-218 .

20.

Dempster, JS. Autonomy in practice: conceptualization, construction, and psychometric evaluation of an empirical instrument [Dissertation]. San Diego, CA: University of San Diego California, 1990.

21.

McDaniel C. Development and psychometric properties of the ethics environment questionnaire . Med Care 1998; 35: 901-914 .

22.

Forysth DR. A taxonomy of ethical ideologies . J Pers Soc Psychol 1980; 39: 175-184 .

23.

HMO county surveyor [Database]. Minneapolis, MN: Interstudy, 2000.

24.

Joreskog KG , Sorbom D. Lisrel 8: structural equation modeling with the simplis command language. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum , 1993.

25.

Stevens J. Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences, third edition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates , 1996.

26.

Jones TM. Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: an issue-contingent model . Acad Manage Rev 1991; 16: 366-395 .

27.

Raines ML. Ethical decision making in nursing: relationships among moral reasoning, coping style, and ethics stress . J Nurs Adm Law Ethics Regul 2000; 2: 29-41 .

28.

Donelan K , Blendon RJ , Lundberg GD et al. The new medical marketplace: physician views . Health Aff 1997; 16: 139-148 .

29.

Freeman VG , Rathore SS , Weinfurt KP , Schulman KA , Sulmasy DP. Lying for patients: physician deception of third-party payers . Arch Intern Med 1999; 159: 2263-2270 .

30.

Sulmasy D , Bloche G , Mitchell J , Hadley J. Physicians’ ethical beliefs about cost-control arrangements . Arch Intern Med 2000; 160: 649-657 .

31.

Yarcheski A , Mahon NE. A causal model of positive health practices: the relationship between approach and replication . Nurs Res 1989; 28: 88-93 .

32.

Munro B. Statistical methods for health care research, third edition. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott , 1997.