Morgan, L., Flynn, L., Robertson, E., New, S., Forde-Johnston, C., & McCulloch, P. (2016). Intentional rounding: A staff-led quality improvement intervention in the prevention of patient falls. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 26(1-2), 115-124.
Critique for Research Problem, Research Questions, and Hypotheses
The research study was designed to solve nursing problem of patient falls, which is easy to locate and is clearly stated in the study in its aims and objectives section located at the first page of the report. The report built a persuasive and cogent argument for the study. The authors highlighted the significance of the problem in the nursing setting and indicated that Intentional Rounding (IR) as a strategy that has been regarded as remedy. The problem has significance in nursing since patient falling during treatment in hospitals is associated with reduced healthcare outcomes and increase in treatment costs (Hirose et al., 2018).
Read also Falls Among Elderly Patients Over 70 Years Old – Critical Incident for Bow-Tie Analysis
There is a good fit between the research problem and the paradigm within which the study was conducted. The incidences of patient falls have been widely documented in nursing care settings especially among men, which can aggravate symptoms or even cause disability (Lerdal, Sigurdsen, Hammerstad, Granheim & Gay, 2018). Therefore the report provides a good fit between the problem and the paradigm within which it was conducted. However, the report did not provide a formal research purpose, research questions and research hypothesis. Instead, the researchers provided the research aims and objectives and other parts of the report such as setting, methods, observations, and conclusion. There was no logical placement of the information in a clear way typical of a peer-reviewed nursing research article.
Read also Appropriate Strategies for Administering the Quality Improvement and Risk-Management Processes within a Healthcare Delivery System
There are no purpose statements, research questions or statement of research concepts and the variables of the study, though the report specifies that the study was carried out on a 75-bed neuro-science ward of a tertiary referral hospital (Morgan et al., 2016). Although there were no formal hypotheses, their exclusion was not justified. Despite the absence of hypotheses, there were statistical analysis performed as the report provided, for example an analysis of the mean visits was done.
Critique for Literature Review
The article employed researches that were recent considered within the period that was published. Since the article was published in 2016, the review of the literature section indicates that the authors used researches that were latest during that period. Although there are some references used that were published as far as 2006, they were mainly used to provide similar evidence as research that were published using recent evidence. For example, in showing the historical use of intentional rounding (IR), the author indicated that it has been employed for long, and this was backed by literature that showed evidence of IR use, thus the use of studies dated 2008 (Morgan et al., 2016). The authors employed major studies and recent research in the study. For example, the authors employed recent research done on IR in the United States and the pilot studies in the UK.
Read also Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005
In its review, the authors used mainly primary resources that included research done on the research topic in the primary setting. However, the authors did not provide a critical analysis, appraisal and comparison of the key studies. Although the authors identify the gap in the literature, the conclusion is based on a narrow analysis, evaluation and comparison of few studies. The authors provided an introduction, which include the origins of IR, the problem of patient falls, its implications, and approaches. This is later followed by the background research, where researchers provide a minimal background research before making conclusion on IR.
The review is well organized, starting with historical development of IR, then the importance, analysis, appraisal, and comparison to the studies to draw the conclusion. The ideas were developed in a short and clear manner. In addition, appropriate language was employed by the researchers, with a suggestion of the tentative nature of prior findings. The review was objectives as the researchers performed an evaluation of prior research and pointed the gap in the transferability of the IR findings in the US in the NHS context. This provided an objective review though the literature review is not as detailed as expected of a good review.
The review was in the introduction of a new study and the authors indicated the need for the study. The authors reviewed literature on the historical developments of IR and other studies that have been done on its implementation and use in the nursing setting. This allowed the authors to identify the research gap and support the need for the study. The review designed and evaluated a clinical intervention of reducing patient falls using IR. The report drew appropriate implications about the implications of the new intervention to the nursing practice
Order Unique Answer Now