Research Critiques And PICOT Question Guidelines Paper

Qualitative and Quantitative Studies
Introduction
1. Introduce your nursing practice problem and discuss the purpose of your paper.
2. State your updated PICOT question incorporating any feedback that you received from your instructor.
Background of Studies
1. Summary of studies including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions.
How Do These Four Articles Support the Nursing Practice Problem You Chose?
1. Discuss how the four articles will be used to answer your PICOT question.
2. Describe how the interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in your PICOT question.

ORDER HERE A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER 

Method of Studies: Research Critiques And PICOT Question Guidelines Paper
1. State the methods of the four articles you are comparing and describe how they are different.
2. State one benefit and one limitation of each method you have identified.
Results of Studies:
1. Summarize the key findings of each of the studies into a comprehensive summary.
2. What are the implications of the four studies you chose in nursing practice?
Ethical Considerations
1. Discuss two ethical considerations in conducting research.
2. Describe how the researchers in the four articles you choose took these ethical considerations into account while performing their research.
Outcomes Comparison
1. What are the anticipated outcomes for your PICOT question?
2. How do the outcomes of the four articles you chose compare to your anticipated outcomes?Research Critiques And PICOT Question Guidelines Paper

Qualitative and Quantitative Studies

The selected nursing practice issue addressed in this project is the high rate of pressure ulcers (PU) in inpatient units. Studies show that the prevalence of PU has increased dramatically, especially among bed-ridden patients in various departments, including the intensive care unit (ICU), surgical units, medical unit, and medical-surgical departments. The high rate of PU in the affected departments is associated with limited mobility among patients receiving healthcare services in these units. According to Al Mutair et al. (2020), pressure ulcers (PUs) result in adverse health outcomes, including a high morbidity rate among hospitalized patients. Consequently, the prevalence of PU has increased to 4% – 49% globally (Al Mutair et al., 2020)Research Critiques And PICOT Question Guidelines Paper. Additionally, the high incidence of PU results in longer hospital stays and a high cost of care.  PU is more than physical complications; hence requires intensive treatment, imposing a huge financial burden on individual patients and health care facilities. Thus, preventive measures should be adopted to lower the high incidence of PU in inpatient units. This paper criticizes quantitative and qualitative studies on PU preventive interventions.

PICOT Question and Relevance to the Topic

            The proposed PICOT question states; “For elderly patients in the medical-surgical unit who are at a high risk of developing pressure ulcers (P), does the implementation of a skin bundle compared to turning and positioning only (I) more effective compared to usual care (C) and reduce the rates of hospital-acquired pressure ulcers (O) within two weeks of hospitalization?”

Combined Qualitative and Quantitative Studies

Background of Studies

            Two qualitative studies on pressure ulcers were analyzed in this project. The first study was conducted by Saleh et al. (2019) conducted an observational study on PU prevention to assess knowledge about pressure ulcers and the underutilization of PU care in Jordan. It indicated that increasing nurses’ knowledge regarding PU would improve PU prevention and care, reducing patient suffering. Secondly, Lotfi et al. (2019) conducted a descriptive cross‐sectional study to evaluate nurses’ knowledge, behavior, and attitude in preventing pressure injuries. Study findings indicated that improving nurses’ knowledge, attitude, and behavior through training positively impacts pressure treatment Research Critiques And PICOT Question Guidelines Paper.

Additionally, quantitative studies were reviewed to gather data on PU prevention. The first study was conducted by Tayyib et al. (2021) to evaluate the effectiveness of the SKINCARE bundle in preventing medical-device-related pressure injuries in critical care units. The bundle includes skin assessment, cleaning, and moisturizing. The study findings indicated that the bundle effectively prevents medical-device-related pressure injuries. The second study was conducted by Mao & Zhu (2021) to evaluate the effects of pressure ulcer prevention among patients. The study findings indicated that the pressure ulcer prevention bundle effectively prevents pressure ulcers than routine care.

ORDER HERE

The four studies are similar in the problem since all were triggered by a dramatic increase in pressure ulcer prevalence in various clinical settings. Secondly, all the studies are significant to nursing practice since they have proposed interventions for preventing PU in clinical settings. However, the qualitative articles and quantitative articles differ in terms of purpose, objective, and research question. Qualitative articles aimed at assessing knowledge concerning the prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers. Thus, qualitative studies do not relate to the proposed PICOT question. On the other hand, quantitative articles aimed at assessing the effectiveness of different interventions in preventing PU. Hence, the quantitative studies relate to the PICOT question, which compares the effectiveness of skin bundle compared to turning and positioning in preventing pressure ulcers. However, all four articles present to the reader subjective information about the topic idea since they have focused on PU knowledge and prevention Research Critiques And PICOT Question Guidelines Paper.

Support for Nursing Practice and the PICO question

The proposed PICOT question states, “Among elderly patients in the medical-surgical unit who are at a high risk of developing pressure ulcers (P), does the use of routine repositioning and pressure distribution devices (I) more effective compared to usual care (C) in reducing the rates of hospital-acquired pressure ulcers (O) within two weeks of hospitalization?” Saleh et al. (2019) assessed knowledge concerning preventing and treating pressure ulcers among Jordan nurses. Secondly, Lotfi et al. (2019) assessed the knowledge, behavior, and attitude of nurses on taking care of the skin, preventing, and managing pressure injury. Therefore, the PICOT question is not supported by the selected qualitative studies.

On the contrary, the selected quantitative studies support the PICOT question. Tayyib et al.’s (2021) study findings indicate the effectiveness of the SKINCARE bundle in preventing medical-device-related pressure injuries among critically ill patients. Thus, this study supports the PICOT question. Additionally, Mao and Zhu’s (2021) findings indicated that care bundles effectively reduce the incidence of pressure ulcers. Therefore, the study would help in answering the proposed PICOT question by indicating the effectiveness of care bundles in improving PU among inpatients.

The selected qualitative studies have no defined intervention and comparison groups. On the contrary, quantitative studies have clearly defined intervention and comparison groups. Tayyib et al.’s (2021) intervention group was the SKINCARE bundle, while normal care was the comparison group. Thus, the intervention group in this article (Skincare bundle) is similar to the PICOT question (Skincare). However, the comparison group in this article (Normal care) is different from the comparison group (Turning and positioning). Secondly, the intervention group in Mao & Zhu (2021) is the pressure ulcer prevention bundle, which is similar to the PICOT question. On the contrary, the comparison group in this article is routine care, which is different from the PICOT question Research Critiques And PICOT Question Guidelines Paper.

Method of Studies

            Saleh et al. (2019) and Lotfi et al. (2019) utilized qualitative methodology to collect data in their studies. However, Saleh et al. (2019) used a prospective 8-h observation to collect data from the participants. A prospective 8-h observation requires little time to collect data from the participants. However, the researchers will likely leave out essential details when data is collected via observation. On the other hand, Lotfi et al. (2019) used a self-reported cross-sectional survey to collect data. These data collection techniques have benefits and limitations. Using a cross-sectional survey in data collection consumes less time. However, this data collection methodology requires a large sample size to collect usable data.

On the other hand, Tayyib et al. (2021) and Mao and Zhu (2021) utilized a quantitative data collection methodology. Nonetheless, these articles differ in data collection procedures. Tayyib et al. (2021) conducted a prospective clinical trial involving patients in the ICU who are at risk of developing pressure ulcers. A prospective clinical trial has benefits and limitations. This study methodology involves experimentation, thus giving credible results. However, it limits the generalizability of the study findings due to the difference between the study’s participants and the general population. Additionally, Mao and Zhu (2021) conducted a randomized clinical trial to assess the effects of pressure-ulcer prevention bundles. This methodology gives credible results since it involves a comparison of intervention and comparison of intervention and control groups. However, it is time-consuming since a long duration is needed to obtain the desired results.

Results of Studies

Saleh et al. (2019) conducted a study to evaluate knowledge concerning preventing and treating pressure ulcers among nurses. The presented evidence indicated that training programs equip nurses with adequate knowledge of PU, improving the prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers in clinical practice. Lotfi et al. (2019) conducted a study to assess the knowledge, behavior, and attitude of nurses on taking care of the skin, preventing, and managing pressure injury. The presented evidence indicated that holding practical workshops improves nurses’ knowledge, behavior, and attitude towards PU, enhancing pressure injury prevention and improving patient safety. Therefore, clinical practices should train their nurses to improve their knowledge, behavior, and attitude towards PU Research Critiques And PICOT Question Guidelines Paper.

On the other hand, Mao & Zhu (2021) reported that care bundles improve self-care efficacy among patients with pressure ulcers. Additionally, Tayyib et al. (2021) indicated that the SKINCARE bundle effectively prevented medical-device-related pressure injuries among patients receiving healthcare care in critical care units. Thus, skin care bundles are an effective intervention for preventing pressure ulcers among patients hospitalized in various units.

Ethical Considerations

            Ethical considerations in research aimed at protecting the participants from any potential harm. In the selected articles, the authors adhered to ethical considerations in their research. First, they considered the ethical principles of informed consent and voluntary participation. The researchers disclosed all relevant information concerning the studies to the targeted respondents and allowed them to decide if they will participate in the studies. Additionally, the participants were free to quit before the studies were completed.

Proposed Evidence-Based Practice Change

The proposed PICOT question, the research articles, and the nursing practice problem are interrelated. The nursing practice problem of concern is the high rate of PU in the inpatient units. The proposed PICOT question focuses on addressing this issue by comparing the effectiveness of the skin care bundle and turning and positioning in preventing PU among elderly patients receiving treatment in the inpatient unit. Lastly, the research articles present evidence, indicating the effectiveness of the skincare bundle in preventing PU among patients hospitalized in various departments. Thus, clinical settings should adopt the skincare bundle as an evidence-based practice change for preventing pressure ulcers among patients hospitalized in various units.

Outcomes Comparison/Conclusion

The proposed PICOT question anticipated the effectiveness of skin care in preventing pressure ulcers among elderly patients. Additionally, Mao & Zhu (2021) reported that care bundles improve self-care efficacy among patients with pressure ulcers. Tayyib et al. (2021) also indicated that the SKINCARE bundle effectively prevented medical-device-related pressure injuries among patients receiving healthcare care in critical care units. Thus, the skin care bundle is an effective intervention for preventing pressure ulcers among patients hospitalized in various units Research Critiques And PICOT Question Guidelines Paper.

References

Al Mutair, A., Ambani, Z., Al Obaidan, F., Al Salman, K., Alhassan, H., & Al Mutairi, A. (2020). The effectiveness of pressure ulcer prevention programme: A comparative study. International Wound Journal, 17(1), 214-219. Doi: 10.1111/iwj.13259.

Lotfi, M., Aghazadeh, A. M., Asgarpour, H., & Nobakht, A. (2019). Iranian nurses’ knowledge, attitude, and behavior on skin care, prevention, and management of pressure injury: A descriptive cross‐sectional study. Nursing Open, 6(4), 1600-1605. Doi: 10.1002/nop2.365

Mao, X., & Zhu, L. (2021). Effects of care bundles for patients with pressure ulcers and the impact on self-care efficacy. American journal of translational research, 13(3), 1799–1807. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8014366/

Saleh, M. Y., Papanikolaou, P., Nassar, O. S., Shahin, A., & Anthony, D. (2019). An observational study of nurses’ knowledge and practice of pressure ulcer prevention and treatment. Journal of tissue viability, 28(4), 210-217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtv.2019.10.005

Tayyib, N., Asiri, M. Y., Danic, S., Sahi, S. L., Lasafin, J., Generale, L. F., Malubay, A., Viloria, P., Palmere, M. G., Parbo, A. R., Aguilar, K. E., Licuanan, P. M., & Reyes, M. (2021). The Effectiveness of the SKINCARE Bundle in Preventing Medical-Device Related Pressure Injuries in Critical Care Units: A Clinical Trial. Advances in skin & wound care, 34(2), 75–80. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ASW.0000725184.13678.80 Research Critiques And PICOT Question Guidelines Paper

Benchmark Assignment: Research Critiques and PICO Question Final Draft
This is your introduction. Please tell the reader about your topic of interest. Explain why you are interested in researching this topic. Remember the introduction needs to grab the reader’s attention and it must give the reader an insight into the whole paper.
PICO Question and Relevance to the Topic
Please make sure you use my feedback from the PICO paper- if you give me the same question without revision you will get penalized- my feedback should help you with creating a strong PICO. Explain how your PICO question is related to your topic and how the studies are related to the PICO.
Combined Qualitative and Quantitative Studies
Background
You will summarize the backgrounds of first the qualitative studies (paragraph 1) and then quantitative studies (paragraph 2)- showing similarities and differences in the problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research question. How do they all relate to your PICO? How did these studies show the reader the subjective information about the topic idea?
Support for Nursing Practice and the PICO question
Discuss how the four articles separately and together answer the PICO question. Explain how the qualitative and quantitative results relate to your PICO question. As nurses we are interested in not only the numbers (quantitative, objective data) but how the person (patient, nurse, etc.) is impacted by the problem and the solution (qualitative, subjective data).
Method of Study
Explain the research method of each of the articles you are comparing and how each method selected by the researcher is relevant to your topic. For example, in paragraph one; please explain the methods of your qualitative studies. Were these studies ethnographic, phenomenological, narrative, case study or grounded? Explain why the researcher felt a better understanding of cultures, customs, habits, and differences was important to better understand the topic. Explain one benefit and one limitation of the method selected for this study. Why was this method appropriate for what the researchers wanted to learn? Was this approach appropriate to getting the answer to their burning question (PICO)? Research Critiques And PICOT Question Guidelines Paper
In the second paragraph, you will tell the reader what method of quantitative the researcher used, such as descriptive, correlational, experimental, quasi-experimental. Explain the value of quantitative research when examining your topic of interest. Explain one benefit and one limitation of the method selected for this study. Why was this method appropriate for what the researchers wanted to learn? Was this approach appropriate to getting the answer to their burning question (PICO)? Please use your textbook to support your decision.
Results of Study
Summarize the key findings of your qualitative studies into one comprehensive paragraph. Look for similarities, differences, and how the results would help you make a change project happen in your area of practice. Remember the specific method will bring a specific theme of findings. Do the same for your quantitative studies. Explain in this area how the results of these studies can impact nursing practice, yours and overall nursing practice.
Ethical Considerations
Discuss the importance of ethical research practice (use your text to support your statements) and describe how the researchers in the four articles you choose took these ethical considerations into account while performing their research.
Proposed Evidence-Based Practice Change
Based on the research you found, what practice change proposal would you suggest? Is it an idea that you can take to your management/ leadership? What is the link between the burning question (PICO) and the answer (the study results)? How can the answers impact nursing practice? What changes may improve patient outcomes, nurse attrition, etc.?
Outcomes Comparison/ Conclusion
Now go back up to your PICO question. Your four studies should be able to provide you a theme to best practice in answering your question. In a sense you should now have an answer to your burning question!! Explain how the results of the four articles you chose to support or don’t support your PICO question. How can this research help you become a safer, kinder, more compassionate nurse? Research Critiques And PICOT Question Guidelines Paper

Research Critiques and PICOT Question Guidelines –
Final Draft
Use this document to organize the content from your four studies into your final draft. Successful completion of this assignment requires that you tie together Part I and Part II and provide revisions based on your instructor’s feedback, as well as describing the outcomes and proposed evidence-based practice change.
Qualitative and Quantitative Studies
Introduction
1. Introduce your nursing practice problem and discuss the purpose of your paper.
2. State your updated PICOT question incorporating any feedback that you received from your instructor.
Background of Studies
1. Summary of studies including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions.
How Do These Four Articles Support the Nursing Practice Problem You Chose?
1. Discuss how the four articles will be used to answer your PICOT question.
2. Describe how the interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in your PICOT question.
Method of Studies:
1. State the methods of the four articles you are comparing and describe how they are different.
2. State one benefit and one limitation of each method you have identified.
Results of Studies: Research Critiques And PICOT Question Guidelines Paper
1. Summarize the key findings of each of the studies into a comprehensive summary.
2. What are the implications of the four studies you chose in nursing practice?
Ethical Considerations
1. Discuss two ethical considerations in conducting research.
2. Describe how the researchers in the four articles you choose took these ethical considerations into account while performing their research.
Outcomes Comparison
1. What are the anticipated outcomes for your PICOT question?
2. How do the outcomes of the four articles you chose compare to your anticipated outcomes?

ORDER TODAY

Proposed Evidence-Based Practice Change
1. What is the link between the PICOT question, the research articles, and the nursing practice problem you identified?
2. Based on this information, propose an evidence-based practice change for your identified setting.
Conclusion
1. Your conclusion should summarize the main points in the essay, including a varied restatement of the thesis Research Critiques And PICOT Question Guidelines Paper