Predictors of Nurse Practitioners’ Autonomy: Effects of Organizational, Ethical, and Market Characteristics

C. Ulrich, K. Soeken, Nancy Miller
{"title":"Predictors of Nurse Practitioners’ Autonomy: Effects of Organizational, Ethical, and Market Characteristics","authors":"C. Ulrich, K. Soeken, Nancy Miller","doi":"10.1111/j.1745-7599.2003.tb00405.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose To identify the predictors of autonomy of nurse practitioners (NPs) affiliated directly and/or indirectly with managed‐care systems (e.g., HMOs). Data Sources A mailed survey sent to a stratified random sample of 254 NPs certified and licensed to practice in the state of Maryland. The measures consisted of selected organizational char‐acteristics; market factors of HMO penetration and percentage of client population enrolled in managed care; and factors of ethical concern, such as ethical ideology, ethics education, and autonomy. The County Surveyor Database was used to assess market penetration in the state. Conclusions Although NPs were ethically concerned about their autonomy in a managed‐care environment (70.2%), actual autonomy scores were high. The higher the percentage of HMO penetration, percentage of client population enrolled in managed care, and perceived ethi‐cal concern, the lower the perceived autonomy of NPs. Implications for Practice Findings may be used for future research to address the complexity of variables that influence the autonomous practice of NPs.","PeriodicalId":50020,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners","volume":"15 1","pages":"367–375"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/j.1745-7599.2003.tb00405.x","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-7599.2003.tb00405.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Purpose To identify the predictors of autonomy of nurse practitioners (NPs) affiliated directly and/or indirectly with managed‐care systems (e.g., HMOs). Data Sources A mailed survey sent to a stratified random sample of 254 NPs certified and licensed to practice in the state of Maryland. The measures consisted of selected organizational char‐acteristics; market factors of HMO penetration and percentage of client population enrolled in managed care; and factors of ethical concern, such as ethical ideology, ethics education, and autonomy. The County Surveyor Database was used to assess market penetration in the state. Conclusions Although NPs were ethically concerned about their autonomy in a managed‐care environment (70.2%), actual autonomy scores were high. The higher the percentage of HMO penetration, percentage of client population enrolled in managed care, and perceived ethi‐cal concern, the lower the perceived autonomy of NPs. Implications for Practice Findings may be used for future research to address the complexity of variables that influence the autonomous practice of NPs.
护士执业自主权的预测因素:组织、伦理和市场特征的影响
目的确定直接和/或间接隶属于管理式护理系统(如hmo)的执业护士(NPs)自主性的预测因素。数据来源一项邮寄调查,发送给在马里兰州获得认证和执业许可的254名NPs分层随机样本。这些措施包括选定的组织特征;HMO渗透的市场因素和参加管理式医疗的客户人口百分比;以及伦理意识、伦理教育、伦理自治等伦理关注因素。使用县测量师数据库来评估该州的市场渗透率。结论:尽管护士在伦理上关心他们在管理式护理环境中的自主性(70.2%),但实际的自主性得分很高。HMO的渗透率越高,参与管理医疗的客户群体比例越高,感知到的道德关注越低,感知到的NPs自主性越低。实践发现的含义可用于未来的研究,以解决影响NPs自主实践的变量的复杂性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信