Influence of Institutional Culture and Policies on Do-Not-Resuscitate Decision Making at the End of Life
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Controversy exists regarding whether the decision to pursue a do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order should be grounded in an ethic of patient autonomy or in the obligation to act in the patient's best interest (beneficence). OBJECTIVE: To explore how physicians' approaches to DNR decision making at the end of life are shaped by institutional cultures and policies surrounding patient autonomy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We performed semistructured in-depth qualitative interviews of 58 internal medicine physicians from 4 academic medical centers (3 in the United States and 1 in the United Kingdom) by years of experience and medical subspecialty from March 7, 2013, through January 8, 2014. Hospitals were selected based on expected differences in hospital culture and variations in hospital policies regarding prioritization of autonomy vs best interest. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: This study identified the key influences of institutional culture and policies on physicians' attitudes toward patient autonomy in DNR decision making at the end of life. RESULTS: A hospital's prioritization of autonomy vs best interest as reflected in institutional culture and policy appeared to influence the way that physician trainees conceptualized patient autonomy. This finding may have influenced the degree of choice and recommendations physician trainees were willing to offer regarding DNR decision making. Trainees at hospitals where policies and culture prioritized autonomy-focused approaches appeared to have an unreflective deference to autonomy and felt compelled to offer the choice of resuscitation neutrally in all situations regardless of whether they believed resuscitation to be clinically appropriate. In contrast, trainees at hospitals where policies and culture prioritized best-interest-focused approaches appeared to be more comfortable recommending against resuscitation in situations where survival was unlikely. Experienced physicians at all sites similarly did not exclusively allow their actions to be defined by policies and institutional culture and were willing to make recommendations against resuscitation if they believed it would be futile. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Institutional cultures and policies might influence how physician trainees develop their professional attitudes toward autonomy and their willingness to make recommendations regarding the decision to implement a DNR order. A singular focus on autonomy might inadvertently undermine patient care by depriving patients and surrogates of the professional guidance needed to make critical end of life decisions.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Discussions with the patient or those close to the patient from a goal-of-care perspective took place with a focus on comfort care without explicitly mentioning resuscitation.
“Discussions with the patient or those close to the patient from a goal-of-care perspective took place with a focus on comfort care without explicitly mentioning resuscitation.52”
From Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation decision-making process: scoping review (2025) · cites this paper as [52]
Ethical attitudes toward DNACPR decision-making reflect hospital policy regarding prioritisation of autonomy over best interests.
“However, ethical attitudes toward DNACPR decision-making reflect hospital policy regarding prioritisation of autonomy over best interests,52”
From Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation decision-making process: scoping review (2025) · cites this paper as [52]
Cites
Qualitative research in health care: Assessing quality in qualitative research
Mays, N. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7226.50 · Cited by 3,742 · see citing works
Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog?
Barbour, R. S. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115 · Cited by 2,613 · see citing works
Medical Futility: Its Meaning and Ethical Implications
Schneiderman, L. J., Jecker, N. S., & Jonsen, A. R. (1990) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-112-12-949 · Cited by 1,215 · see citing works
Regional and Institutional Variation in the Initiation of Early Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders
Zingmond, D. S., & Wenger, N. S. (2005) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.165.15.1705 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Culture and personal influences on cardiopulmonary resuscitation- results of international survey
Ozer, J., Alon, G., Leykin, D., Varon, J., Aharonson-Daniel, L., & Einav, S. (2019) · BMC Medical Ethics · doi:10.1186/s12910-019-0439-x · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Bedulli, M., Falvo, I., Merlani, P., Hurst, S., & Fadda, M. (2023) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0282270 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation decision-making process: scoping review
Doody, O., Davidson, H., & Lombard, J. (2025) · BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care · doi:10.1136/spcare-2023-004573 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
“52”
- Authors
- Dzeng, E., Colaianni, A., Roland, M., Chander, G., Smith, T. J., Kelly, M. P., Barclay, S., & Levine, D.
- Affiliations
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- JAMA Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2015-05-01
- Volume
- 175
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 812
- ISSN
- 2168-6106 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2148764735
- Cited by
- 136
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 5 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 16.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- JAMA Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Apollo (University of Cambridge) (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Public Health Service (T32 HP10025-20)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Ethics in medical practice
- Keywords
- do-not-resuscitate orders, end-of-life decisions, patient autonomy, institutional culture, hospital policy, beneficence, best interests, physician attitudes, internists, medical trainees, resuscitation decisions, futility
- MeSH terms
- Attitude of Health Personnel, Decision Making, Ethics, Institutional, United Kingdom, Humans, Physician-Patient Relations, Physicians, Terminal Care, United States, Organizational Policy, Resuscitation Orders, Hospital-Physician Relations, Personal Autonomy, Patient Rights, Qualitative Research
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review