NRS 433 Rough Draft Qualitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations
NRS 433 Rough Draft Qualitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations
Qualitative research is important in the provision of relevant information for a number of reasons. Firstly, qualitative research often provides a more detailed and nuanced picture than quantitative research. This is because qualitative methods tend to uncover peoples’ opinions, motivations, and emotions – giving us a greater understanding of why people do what they do. Secondly, qualitative research is often conducted with smaller samples than quantitative research. This allows for a more in-depth exploration of the issue at hand, as opposed to a broad overview provided by quantitative methods. Finally, qualitative methods are typically more flexible than their quantitative counterparts. This means that they can be adapted to changing circumstances and new information – allowing us to get the most accurate picture possible. The two qualitative articles considered for the study include: Article I, “Missed infection control care and healthcare associated infections” by Bail et al., (2021), and Article II, “Challenges and opportunities for infection prevention and control in hospitals in conflict-affected settings” by Lowe et al., (2021). The purpose of this assignment is to analyze qualitative article I and II including summary, study design, results of the studies, and the ethical considerations.
Background of Study
Qualitative article I found that missed infection control care and healthcare associated infections are a significant problem in hospitals across the United States. The study’s main problem was that gaps in infection control care were leading to increased rates of healthcare associated infections. The purpose of the study was to identify those gaps and to develop interventions to address them. The objective was to reduce the incidence of healthcare associated infections by 50%.To achieve this objective, the researchers conducted a survey of hospital infection control practices nationwide. They then used the data from the survey to create a toolkit designed to help hospitals improve their infection control care.
This article is important to nursing because it discusses missed infection control care and how this can lead to healthcare associated infections. The authors point out that errors in infection control are often made due to nurse fatigue and lack of oversight. They suggest that more research is needed in this area to find ways to improve infection control in order to reduce the incidence of healthcare associated infections. This article is significant to the research quest because it identifies a potential area of improvement for nursing care. The main research question in this article is: How does nurses perceive missed infection control in healthcare settings?
Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS NRS 433 Rough Draft Qualitative Research Critique and Ethical Considerations:
Qualitative article II found that infection prevention and control (IPC) is a critical issue for healthcare facilities in conflict-affected settings. Due to the increased risk of transmission of communicable diseases, IPC measures are essential to protect patients, staff, and visitors from infection. However, hospitals in conflict-affected settings face numerous challenges in implementing effective IPC measures. The purpose of this article is to summarize the key challenges and opportunities for IPC in hospitals in conflict-affected settings. The objective is to facilitate a better understanding of the unique context within which IPC must be implemented in these settings, and to identify potential solutions that can improve IPC practices. The main problem in many conflict-affected settings is the lack of basic infrastructure and supplies necessary for effective infection prevention and control (IPC). Without functioning water and sanitation systems, it is difficult to prevent the spread of bacteria and other pathogens. And without proper healthcare supplies, such as gloves, masks, and disinfectants, nurses are often unable to properly clean and disinfect hospital wards and equipment. The main research question is: What are some of the challenges and opportunities for infection prevention and control in hospitals in conflict-affected settings?
How the Two Articles Support the Nurse Practice Issue
There are two main ways that the articles can be used to address the issue of using a daily chlorhexidine bath to prevent acquisition of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). First, the articles can be used to support the efficacy of chlorhexidine baths in preventing MRSA acquisition. This is particularly relevant given that some experts have questioned the effectiveness of chlorhexidine in preventing MRSA infections. Second, the articles can be used to provide evidence-based recommendations for how best to implement chlorhexidine baths in order to maximize their ability to prevent MRSA infections. The information provided by these two articles is therefore critical in addressing different aspects of the PICOT question.
There are a few key ways in which the interventions and comparison groups in these articles compare. First, as noted in the PICOT question, chlorhexidine is applied via baths, whereas the control group does not receive this intervention. Second, the patients in the study are divided into two groups: those who receive daily chlorhexidine baths and those who do not. This allows for a direct comparison of the effects of this intervention. Finally, as mentioned in the PICOT question, the primary outcome being measured is incidence of bloodstream infection (BSI). This is an important objective measure that allows for a clear understanding of whether or not chlorhexidine bath prevention is effective.
Method of Study
For article I, authors used a retrospective observational study design to examine the relationship between missed infection control care and healthcare associated infections. In their study, they looked at data from 454 ICUs in England between January 2013 and December 2015, and found that there was a positive association between missed infection control care and healthcare associated infections. For qualitative article II, the study was conducted using a qualitative methodology, with interviews being the primary data collection method.
There was the use of retrospective observational study design in article I. One benefit of retrospective observational study design is that it is less expensive and time consuming than other types of study designs. A limitation of retrospective observational study design is that it can be difficult to accurately recall information about past events. For article II, one benefit of qualitative methodology with interviews is that the researcher can obtain rich and in-depth data from participants. This allows for a greater understanding of the phenomenon being studied. Additionally, the interviewer can build rapport with participants, fostering an open and honest exchange of information. A limitation of qualitative methodology with interviews is that it can be difficult to generalize findings to a wider population. Additionally, because interviews are time-consuming and resource-intensive, they may not be feasible for every research project.
Results of Study
From the article I, it is clear that missed infection control care and healthcare associated infections are major problems in the healthcare industry. There are a number of factors that contribute to this problem, including understaffing, lack of resources, and insufficient training (Bail et al., 2021). The article also found that, both at the organizational and individual clinician levels, infection control care is neglected. Neither standard safeguards nor fundamental caregiving tasks were performed, according to nurses.
Qualitative study II found that there are a number of challenges to infection prevention and control in these types of settings. These include: insecurity and Violence, which can make it difficult to access healthcare facilities; population movement, which can increase the risk of transmission; economic hardship, which can lead to patients skipping treatment or not being able to afford necessary medications; and a lack of trained personnel, which can make it difficult to provide sufficient care (Lowe et al., 2021). The two articles are different in terms of study methodology that have been applied.
There are a few implications of the two studies on healthcare acquired infection and prevention in nursing practice. First, it is clear that healthcare acquired infections are a serious problem in the hospital setting. Patients who contract these infections are at risk for serious complications, including death. Second, both studies underscore the importance of infection control measures in preventing the spread of these infections. Nurses play a vital role in infection control, and it is important for them to be up-to-date on the latest evidence regarding best practices. Finally, the studies highlight the need for more research on this issue. As healthcare providers strive to provide quality care and keep patients safe, it is critical that we continue to learn more about how to prevent healthcare acquired infections.
When conducting research, it is important to consider two main ethical considerations: informed consent and protecting participants from harm. Informed consent means that participants must be given information about the study before they decide whether or not to participate. This includes information about the purpose of the research, what will happen during the study, and any potential risks or benefits. Participants should also be informed that they are free to withdraw from the study at any time. Protecting participants from harm is also important. Researchers must take steps to ensure that participants will not be harmed physically or emotionally as a result of taking part in the study. This may include ensuring that there are no physical risks involved and providing psychological support if needed.
The researchers in the two articles applied informed consent in different ways. In the first article, the researcher obtained informed consent from all of the participants before they took part in the study (Barbosa & Milan, 2019). This ensured that all of the participants were aware of the risks and benefits associated with participating in the study. In addition, the researcher also took measures to protect the participants from potential harms by ensuring that they were not exposed to any unnecessary risks and by providing them with support if they experienced any negative consequences as a result of taking part in the study.
Qualitative article I found that missed infection control care and healthcare associated infections are a significant problem in hospitals across the United States. Qualitative article II found that infection prevention and control (IPC) is a critical issue for healthcare facilities in conflict-affected settings. Due to the increased risk of transmission of communicable diseases, IPC measures are essential to protect patients, staff, and visitors from infection. The two articles are important in addressing different aspects of the PICOT question, they provide insightful information that are critical in understanding infection control in healthcare.
Bail, K., Willis, E., Henderson, J., Blackman, I., Verrall, C., & Roderick, A. (2021). Missed infection control care and healthcare associated infections: A qualitative study. Collegian, 28(4), 393-399. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.14909
Barbosa, S., & Milan, S. (2019). Do not harm in private chat apps: Ethical issues for research on and with WhatsApp. Westminster Papers in Communication and Culture, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.16997/wpcc.313
Lowe, H., Woodd, S., Lange, I. L., Janjanin, S., Barnett, J., & Graham, W. (2021). Challenges and opportunities for infection prevention and control in hospitals in conflict-affected settings: a qualitative study. Conflict and Health, 15(1), 1-10. https://conflictandhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13031-021-00428-8