In a 1,000–1,250 word essay, summarize two qualitative studies, explain the ways in which the findings might be used in nursing practice
Write a critical appraisal that demonstrates comprehension of two qualitative research studies. Use the “Research Critique Guidelines – Part 1” document to organize your essay. Successful completion of this assignment requires that you provide rationale, include examples, and reference content from the studies in your responses.
Use the practice problem and two qualitative, peer-reviewed research article you identified in the Topic 1 assignment to complete this assignment.
In a 1,000–1,250 word essay, summarize two qualitative studies, explain the ways in which the findings might be used in nursing practice, and address ethical considerations associated with the conduct of the study.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
Research Critique Guidelines
Qualitative Study
Background of Study:
- Identify the clinical problem and research problem that led to the study. What was not known about the clinical problem that, if understood, could be used to improve health care delivery or patient outcomes? This gap in knowledge is the research problem.
- How did the author establish the significance of the study? In other words, why should the reader care about this study? Look for statements about human suffering, costs of treatment, or the number of people affected by the clinical problem.
- Identify the purpose of the study. An author may clearly state the purpose of the study or may describe the purpose as the study goals, objectives, or aims.
- List research questions that the study was designed to answer. If the author does not explicitly provide the questions, attempt to infer the questions from the answers.
- Were the purpose and research questions related to the problem?
Method of Study:
- Were qualitative methods appropriate to answer the research questions?
- Did the author identify a specific perspective from which the study was developed? If so, what was it?
- Did the author cite quantitative and qualitative studies relevant to the focus of the study? What other types of literature did the author include?
- Are the references current? For qualitative studies, the author may have included studies older than the 5-year limit typically used for quantitative studies. Findings of older qualitative studies may be relevant to a qualitative study.
- Did the author evaluate or indicate the weaknesses of the available studies?
- Did the literature review include adequate information to build a logical argument?
- When a researcher uses the grounded theory method of qualitative inquiry, the researcher may develop a framework or diagram as part of the findings of the study. Was a framework developed from the study findings?
Results of Study
- What were the study findings?
- What are the implications to nursing?
- Explain how the findings contribute to nursing knowledge/science. Would this impact practice, education, administration, or all areas of nursing?
Ethical Considerations
- Was the study approved by an Institutional Review Board?
- Was patient privacy protected?
- Were there ethical considerations regarding the treatment or lack of?
Conclusion
- Emphasize the importance and congruity of the thesis statement.
- Provide a logical wrap-up to bring the appraisal to completion and to leave a lasting impression and take-away points useful in nursing practice.
- Incorporate a critical appraisal and a brief analysis of the utility and applicability of the findings to nursing practice.
- Integrate a summary of the knowledge learned.
Quantitative Study
Background of Study:
- Identify the clinical problem and research problem that led to the study. What was not known about the clinical problem that, if understood, could be used to improve health care delivery or patient outcomes?This gap in knowledge is the research problem.
- How did the author establish the significance of the study? In other words, why should the reader care about this study? Look for statements about human suffering, costs of treatment, or the number of people affected by the clinical problem.
- Identify the purpose of the study. An author may clearly state the purpose of the study or may describe the purpose as the study goals, objectives, or aims.
- List research questions that the study was designed to answer. If the author does not explicitly provide the questions, attempt to infer the questions from the answers.
- Were the purpose and research questions related to the problem?
Methods of Study
- Identify the benefits and risks of participation addressed by the authors. Were there benefits or risks the authors do not identify?
- Was informed consent obtained from the subjects or participants?
- Did it seem that the subjects participated voluntarily in the study?
- Was institutional review board approval obtained from the agency in which the study was conducted?
- Are the major variables (independent and dependent variables) identified and defined? What were these variables?
- How were data collected in this study?
- What rationale did the author provide for using this data collection method?
- Identify the time period for data collection of the study.
- Describe the sequence of data collection events for a participant.
- Describe the data management and analysis methods used in the study.
- Did the author discuss how the rigor of the process was assured? For example, does the author describe maintaining a paper trail of critical decisions that were made during the analysis of the data? Was statistical software used to ensure accuracy of the analysis?
- What measures were used to minimize the effects of researcher bias (their experiences and perspectives)? For example, did two researchers independently analyze the data and compare their analyses?
Results of Study
- What is the researcher’s interpretation of findings?
- Are the findings valid or an accurate reflection of reality? Do you have confidence in the findings?
- What limitations of the study were identified by researchers?
- Was there a coherent logic to the presentation of findings?
- What implications do the findings have for nursing practice? For example, can the findingsof the study be applied to general nursing practice, to a specific population, or to a specific area of nursing?
- What suggestions are made for further studies?
Ethical Considerations
- Was the study approved by an Institutional Review Board?
- Was patient privacy protected?
- Were there ethical considerations regarding the treatment or lack of?
Conclusion
- Emphasize the importance and congruity of the thesis statement.
- Provide a logical wrap-up to bring the appraisal to completion and to leave a lasting impression and take-away points useful in nursing practice.
- Incorporate a critical appraisal and a brief analysis of the utility and applicability of the findings to nursing practice.
- Integrate a summary of the knowledge learned.
Reference
Burns, N., & Grove, S. (2011). Understanding nursing research (5thed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier.
Expert Answer and Explanation
Research Critique Guidelines – Part II (Quantitative Studies)
Dealing with postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting is one of the issues that patients encounter after surgical procedures that affect their comfort and satisfaction and outcomes. Dealing with these challenges can affect the recovery process of the patient and may even prolong the discharge period. Several studies have tried to pinpoint different interventions that can assist in dealing with the issue of postoperative pain nausea and vomiting, with each having different results.
The PICOT question, therefore, aimed to establish whether in adult patients undergoing general anesthesia, does giving preoperative analgesic and antiemetics decrease pain, nausea and vomiting postoperatively and provide better patient outcomes as compared to not receiving preoperative meds.
Quantitative Studies
To answer the PICOT question, this paper selected two quantitative research studies that had evidence-based interventions of dealing with postoperative pain nausea and vomiting. The selected studies were conducted by Elgohary et al. (2017) and Chetna et al. (2014). Some of the elements identified from the studies are detailed in the subsequent sections
Background
The first quantitative article reviewed was an article by Elgohary et al. (2017). The study wanted to carry out a comparison between the effectiveness of the ERAS program and the conventional perioperative care in patients who have undergone elective colorectal surgery. The author notes that the ERAS program has been revolutionary is assisting patients who have undergone colorectal surgery, among other surgical procedures, to respond better to stress and improving postoperative outcomes.
The authors also note that the main aim of the ERAS pathway is to reduce the duration of hospitalization and allow the patient to recover quickly. However, the adoption of the program, especially in developing countries, has been slow despite sufficient evidence showing the effectiveness of the program. Therefore, the authors wanted to carry out a supportive investigation on the effectiveness of the ERAS pathway in patients after undergoing elective colorectal surgery.
The findings collected in this study holds major significance in nursing practice since the results collected will facilitate the adoption of the ERAS pathway as a viable intervention in improving postoperative patient outcomes. The main aim of the research conducted by Elgohary et al. (2017), was to examine the feasibility and safety of the ERAS pathway in elective colorectal surgery. The research question identified from this objective can be quoted as “is the ERAS pathway feasible and safe for use in patients who have undergone elective colorectal surgery.
The second quantitative study selected was conducted by Chetna et al. (2015). The study elaborated on the use of gabapentin for postoperative pain relief for patients who have undergone upper abdominal surgery. The researcher noted that in patients who have undergone upper abdominal surgeries, postoperative pain not only causes them distress but also leads to inadequate respiratory effort and cough reflexes, therefore, a need to have a pain relief strategy.
The authors go further to site the efficacy of gabapentin in dealing with pain on patients who have undergone other types of surgical procedures. Therefore, the study was purposed at identifying whether the drug will still be effective in dealing with postoperative pain, for patients who have undergone upper abdominal surgery. The findings obtained in that research are relevant in enhancing patient recovery period and outcomes by eliminating postoperative pain, and in turn, improving respiratory efforts and cough reflex of the patient. The research question used in the study can be quoted as follows “How effective is gabapentin in reducing postoperative pain in patients who have undergone upper abdominal surgery?”
How do these two articles support the nurse practice issue you chose?
The main aim of the PICOT question was to establish viable methods of dealing with postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting. The two articles provide evidence-based interventions on how postoperative pain can be dealt with. The first article by Elgohary et al. (2017) focuses on the ERAS pathway on reducing postoperative pain while the second article by Chetna et al. (2015) focuses on gabapentin on dealing with postoperative pain in patients who have undergone upper abdominal surgery. The finding on both studies will be used as a basis of assessing the effectiveness of using preoperative analgesics and antiemetics to decrease pain, nausea, and vomiting in patients postoperative as intended by the PICOT question.
The first study was majorly focused on patients who have undergone elective colorectal surgery, while the second article was focused on patients who have undergone upper abdominal surgery. For both studies, the participants were placed in two groups. The first study by Elgohary et al. (2017) used the conventional recovery pathway as their comparison group, while the second study placed their comparison group under placebo. The intervention groups were placed under different perioperative pain regimen. This will be the same approach to be used by the PICOT question, with the difference being the target participants. The PICOT question used adult patients who had undergone general anesthesia preoperative as the target population.
Method of Study:
Both studies conducted used randomized prospective methodology with the analysis being done using descriptive statistics. The advantage of randomized prospective sampling is that it eliminates any bias that might be placed by the researcher. The disadvantage of this methodology is that it is not an ideal method to use for rare diseases since it may be difficult to collect the study sample. One advantage of descriptive statistics is that it allows the potential relationship between variables. The limitation of using descriptive statistics is the fact that the results collected can be used to make inferences only on the sample collected from the study.
Results of Study
The first study realized an eighty percent compliance with the ERAS program. It was noted that patients who had undergone the ERAS pathway had significantly lower pain scores as compared to the comparison group. Likewise, they had a significantly shorter time on the resumption to normal diet as compared to the comparison group. The second study established that the use of preemptive gabapentin had a significant effect in the reduction of postoperative pain as compared to not using it.
The two studies therefore imply that preoperative pain therapy, like the use of gabapentin, has a significant effect in managing postoperative pain and reduces the recovery duration. Therefore, preoperative pain relief regimen is an intervention that should be considered in enhancing postoperative patient outcomes.
Outcomes Comparison
The main outcome of the PICOT question is to come up with a way of managing postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting in patients who have undergone surgery. The achievement of this outcome as identified in the PICOT question is by using preoperative strategies including, pain relief interventions like the use of gabapentin. This outcome is in line with the outcomes of the two selected quantitative studies, that aimed to establish the effectiveness of different postoperative pain management strategies.
References
Chetna A. Jadeja, Rashida Jadaliwala, & Manoj Kathiria. (2014). Pre-emptive use of Gabapentine for postoperative pain relief in upper abdominal surgeries. Indian Journal of Pain, 2, 99. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.4103/0970-5333.132848
Elgohary, H., Baiuomy, M., Abdelkader, A., Hamed, M., & Mosaad, A. (2017). Comparative study between enhanced recovery after surgery and conventional perioperative care in elective colorectal surgery. Egyptian Journal of Surgery, 36(2), 137–144. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.4103/1110-1121.204527
Rezigalla A. A. (2020). Observational Study Designs: Synopsis for Selecting an Appropriate Study Design. Cureus, 12(1), e6692. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.6692
Place your order now for a similar assignment and get fast, cheap and best quality work written by our expert level assignment writers.
Use Coupon Code: NEW30 to Get 30% OFF Your First Order
Other Solved Questions:
SOLVED! How would your communication and interview
ANSWERED!! Explain how the role of epigenetics may contribute to pharmacologic action
ANSWERED!! Select either the PCN Framework or the Chamberlain Care Model.
ANSWERED!! Mrs. Adams a 68-year-old widow who was
ANSWERED!! Read Case 2.1: Hacking into Harvard
SOLVED! New York Times concerning Carpenter v. United States
[ANSWERED] A 58-year-old obese white male presents to ED
[ANSWERED] Compare and contrast the various ways you can
Qualitative Research Critique Example
Here is an example of a critique of a qualitative research study:
Title: “Exploring the experiences of patients with chronic pain: A qualitative study”
Introduction:
The study aims to explore the experiences of patients with chronic pain and their perceptions of healthcare providers and healthcare services. The researchers used a qualitative approach to gather data through in-depth interviews with 10 participants.
Methodology:
The study used a purposive sampling technique to recruit participants who had been diagnosed with chronic pain for at least 6 months. The researchers conducted semi-structured interviews that lasted for about an hour and were audio-recorded. The data were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using thematic analysis.
Results:
The study identified several themes related to the experiences of patients with chronic pain, including the impact of pain on daily life, the challenges of managing pain, and the importance of healthcare providers in managing pain. The participants expressed frustration with the healthcare system and a lack of empathy from healthcare providers.
Critique:
The study has several strengths, including the use of a qualitative approach that allows for an in-depth exploration of the experiences of patients with chronic pain. The study also used a purposive sampling technique that ensured the inclusion of participants with diverse experiences of chronic pain. The researchers also conducted a thorough analysis of the data and identified several key themes.
However, the study has some limitations. The sample size is relatively small, which may limit the generalizability of the findings. The study also did not include any information about the demographics of the participants, which may limit the understanding of the experiences of patients with chronic pain from different backgrounds. Additionally, the study did not address any potential biases that may have influenced the data collection or analysis.
Conclusion:
Overall, the study provides valuable insights into the experiences of patients with chronic pain and their perceptions of healthcare providers and healthcare services. However, the study has some limitations that should be considered when interpreting the findings. Future research should address these limitations and aim to include a more diverse sample to enhance the generalizability of the findings.
Nursing Research Article Critique Example
Here is an example of a critique of a nursing research article:
Title: “Effectiveness of a fall prevention program in reducing falls and injuries among hospitalized patients”
Introduction:
The article discusses a fall prevention program implemented in a hospital setting to reduce the number of falls and fall-related injuries among patients. The study used a pre-post design to evaluate the effectiveness of the program.
Methodology:
The study included 100 patients who were admitted to the hospital and at risk of falling. The fall prevention program consisted of education and training for patients and staff, a falls risk assessment tool, and the use of bed and chair alarms. The study collected data on the number of falls and fall-related injuries before and after the implementation of the program.
Results:
The study found a significant reduction in the number of falls and fall-related injuries after the implementation of the fall prevention program. The incidence rate of falls decreased from 3.8 to 1.2 per 1,000 patient days, and the incidence rate of fall-related injuries decreased from 1.6 to 0.5 per 1,000 patient days.
Critique:
The study has several strengths, including the use of a pre-post design that allowed for the evaluation of the effectiveness of the fall prevention program. The study also included a large sample size and collected data on both the number of falls and fall-related injuries. The fall prevention program used in the study is also practical and can be easily implemented in other hospital settings.
However, the study has some limitations. The study did not include a control group, which limits the ability to determine the effectiveness of the fall prevention program compared to other interventions or usual care. Additionally, the study did not provide any information about the characteristics of the patients who were included in the study, such as their age or medical conditions, which may have influenced the outcomes. The study also did not address any potential biases that may have influenced the data collection or analysis.
Conclusion:
Overall, the study provides evidence for the effectiveness of a fall prevention program in reducing the number of falls and fall-related injuries among hospitalized patients. However, the study has some limitations that should be considered when interpreting the findings. Future research should aim to address these limitations and evaluate the effectiveness of the fall prevention program compared to other interventions or usual care.
