Critique of Research Findings Research Literature

Question: Describe about the Critique of Research Findings for Research Literature. Answer: The purpose of the critique essay is to critically analyze a quantitative and a qualitative research literature to support research development. The process of research critique will be employed to analyze different elements of two articles and determine their importance in the field of research. The reviewer will first analyze the two research article and then undertake a critical analysis of the two studies. The essay first starts with defining research critique and understanding the process by which it is carried out. It explains the stages of critiquing which a reviewer can adopt during the process. Many evidence-based professions require employees to be able to understand and critique research findings. Using an appropriate framework is useful in analyzing each section of the literature (Creswell, 2014).For the critical analysis of two articles, first, a summary will be provided for the topic. Then according to the quantitative and qualitative framework, it will critique one com pulsory section of the article and three other sections of the article to evaluate the findings. The three optional parts that will be reviewed are an introduction, discussion and literature review part. Finally, it will identify how these researches relate health care practice in New Zealand/Aotearoa. Research critique is a process of critical evaluation or appraisal of a research report. It is defined as the systematic, unbiased and careful examination of different aspects of research to judge its value, merits and significance based on relevant knowledge of the topic. Critiquing an article requires intellectual skill and critical thinking to determine the effectiveness of research findings (Clarke Collier, 2015). It is a professional way of analyzing the weakness and strength of a research article. The purpose of critique analysis is to judge whether this research work should be published or not, provide useful comments on a work before it is published. It also acts a learning experience for developing their research skills by reviewing research study. A critiques reviewer explains how well the researcher has carried out different elements of the research process (Howarth et al, 2016). A research critique first determines the purpose of a study by question like- What is the nee d for this research?', will the study improve knowledge about the subject?', or Is the study relevant to professional practice?'. In the next step, they consider the research design as this is a complicated process and requires adequate planning to work according to a theory or framework. For this reason, reviewer tries to identify how the data was collected. In a similar way, research critique analyzes the different section of the research article like methodology, aim, results and other sections (Welch Paavilainenà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ Mntymki, 2014). The approaches for critiquing are to be objective and be constructive to comment on strength, weakness and suggest other alternatives that the researcher could have taken. The importance of research critique lies in magnifying the understanding for the use of data in real practice and in implementing the evidence based professional practice (Sturm Antonakis, 2015). The qualitative research article is on the topic of barriers to nurses adherence to Central Venous Catheter (CVC) guidelines done by the authors Alvin. D. Jeffery and Rita H. Pickler in the year 2014. CVC care practices are evidence based, but many nurses do not adhere to this practice contributing to nosocomial infections. Thus considering this problem the aim of this study was to explore barrier to adherence of CVC care practice in nursing. A descriptive phenomenological method was utilized to interview 10 participants. The data was analyzed by Colaizzi's method, and the finding showed that interventions are needed to reduce barriers identified (Jeffery Pickler, 2014). The method used in the first qualitative research is very apt to understand the nurse's perceived barriers to CVC as data collection in this method helps in describing the lived phenomenological experience. A research study by Smyth et al., (2016) on CVC dressing showed that phemenological method helps to explore nurses perceived experience with CVC dressing. This research article has also appropriately utilized the phemonological method and the author has ensured that they do not deviate from the aim of the research. The strategy for inclusion criteria also helped in getting appropriate participants, and the technique of audio recording assisted in the immersion of the data. The Colaizzi method of data analysis contributed to extracting significant statements and taking additional input lead to getting information about barriers to CVC practice in the nurse. The result findings were also important as participants reported not just environmental barriers but also their personal cogni tive factors acting as a barrier to adhering to CVC practice (Jeffery Pickler, 2014). On the whole, the research finding gave valuable implication to improve barriers in health care system and implement informatics team to facilitate adherence to guidelines. MARTNEZ-MOREL et al., (2016) studying the same topic showed that education programme improves nurses compliance to CVC guideline and reduces the burden of bloodstream infection. The introduction of the first article begins with the report on patients dying every year due to medical errors and the main role of the nurse in this context as they spent the largest proportion of time with patients. The author efficiently reports the problems by stating that efforts has been done to reduce errors in the system but not on the eliminating barriers that prevent nurse from accepting the standard of practice (Jeffery Pickler, 2014). Thus the rationale for the study became apparent with this statement and it also shifted focus on the aim of the research and the immediate attention required addressing the problem. A study on prevalence of CLABSI infection by Mirabel-Chambaud et al., (2016) has shown that introduction mainly starts with identifying the problem and then proceeding towards the purpose of research. This is evident from the study which began with the report on impact of CLABSI infection in a hospital and the then moving towards identifying the barrier in nur ses. The literature in the first article has been logically developed by stating the main problem faced due to non-adherence to CVC guidelines. It reported the prevalence of central-line associated bloodstream infection and the cost to the health system (Jeffery Pickler, 2014). However, the author seems to be summarizing the key points of each literature study, but they have not objectively analyzed the strength and weakness of this study. Although the literature outlined the current understanding of the topic, but it is not an integrated review as critical analysis of each literature is missing. A study by Becerra et al., (2016) is an example of integrated review which measures the prevalence, risk factors and outcome of CVC in different literature and also analyzed the gap in the study. The discussion related to nurse perceived barrier to adherence to a standardized care practice shows that the researcher could find the answer to the research hypothesis. They also compared their finding with other researchers by stating that their result was consistent with findings from other studies in the barriers like time demands, documentation, and staffing (Jeffery Pickler, 2014). Different facts mentioned in literature review also surfaced in this part and thus it complemented existing literature. The author has not mentioned any weakness of this study, but only gave implications for future research on the topic. From the analysis of a peer review study by Howarth et al., (2016), one can interpret that identifying the gap in literature is also a skill as it helps in finding the future scope of the study. However, the study was valuable as it showed that nurses are aware of barriers to adherence, and they also use strategies to rationalize non-adherence. The second article is a quantitative research article on comparative evaluation of antimicrobial-coated versus nonantimicrobial coated peripherally inserted central catheters on patient outcomes carried out in the year 2016. The author of this randomized controlled trial included Susan Storey, Erica Newkirk, Jamie Brown, Angela Foley, Jan Powers, Julie Barger and Karen Piage. As CVCs are associated with life-threatening infections like bloodstream infection, the aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of chlorhexidine (CHG) impregnated central catheter versus non-CHG peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) on blood infection. 167 patients in 3 high-risk units were randomly assigned CHG impregnated or non-CHG PICC to analyze the risk of infections. The findings showed that no difference was noted in the development of infection between CHG and non-CHG groups (Storey et al., 2016). The quantitative article on evaluation of antimicrobial-coated PICC on associated outcomes is a comprehensive research that has covered all the aspects of quantitative research accurately. The need for antimicrobial coated PICC was explicitly explained in view of infections like CLABSI and venous thromboembolism (Chopra et al., 2013). Each element of the investigation is flowing in a coherent and consistent manner which is evident by the method utilized, inclusion strategy and stratified sampling done to ensure adequate participants were taken. The study finding was also accurate and linked to other research objective by Craven Craven, (2016) which showed that there is no relation between the type of PICC line and the type of infection acquired in the patient However, the research is constructive stating both the limitations and the weakness of the study. Within the scope of their methods and number of participants, they did a thorough research which was useful and showed that more action is required in the application of PICC line rather than modifying it (Storey et al., 2016). The introduction is the major highlight of the article on the impact of types of PICC lines on patient outcomes. It strength lies in clearly stating the problem associated with CVCs and how it contributes to problems like CLABSI and VTE in the patient. The author has described the factors associated with each type of infection extremely well and by reading it, readers get a good idea about the risk related to CVCs. It has explicitly mentioned the steps taken to prevent CLABSI by different insertion techniques like CHG, but it also highlighted that there is the lack of research on the impact of antimicrobial-coated PICC on the development of CLABSI or VTE (Storey et al., 2016). The article on appropriate utilization of PICC line by Mikolajczak et al., (2016) also highlighted in the introduction section that PICC line are more invasive than other options and expose them to further risk of CLABSI Thus, the transition from stating the problem to moving towards the need to carry out this research was accurately mentioned by authors. The literature developed in this research is not on the topic that is being investigated, but it gives detail on the techniques and maintenance adopted to prevent CLABSIs. The authors have provided the detail on insertion technique utilized such as site preparation using chlorhexidine (CHG), sterile barriers, sterile insertion procedures like using mask, gloves and preventing femoral site infection. Evidence-based studies showed that antimicrobial catheter is also used when if there is no improvement in CLABSI rate. Thus literature review by authors gave detail on CLABSI occurring due to CVCs located in femoral, subclavian and jugular veins (Worth et al., 2015). However, no literature review is done on the aim of research as there is the lack of research on the impact of antimicrobial PICC on the development of CLABSI or VTE. The article on prospective study on incidence of complication in cancer patient with PICC explored the impact of PICC on development of infection too (Bertoglio et al., 2016). The discussion of the research contributed in fulfilling the objective of research and gave the answer to the impact of antimicrobial-coated PICC on different types of infection in patients. The discussion section was accurate as it evaluated the research finding related to CLABSI, VTE, and post-insertion bleeding separately. The author could finally conclude that no difference was noted in the development of infection between non-CHG and CHG PICC group. The information in the discussion is explicit with a clear statement on strength and weakness of the study. It also compared their study with other researchers and showed that their finding differ from other study by Moureau Chopra, (2016) which showed that CHG PICC group had reduced risk It was also useful in providing a rationale for variations in systems like reducing risk by insertion, daily assessment, and dressing changes (Storey et al., 2016). The findings of the research will have valuable implication for nursing practice in New Zealand as health care could take lessons from the research finding and implement efforts that focus on improvement in system and nurses too to reduce error in using CVC practice. One literature investigated the current medical and nursing management of CVC in Australia and New Zealand and compared it with evidence-based practice guideline. The findings showed that great diversity exists in current practices, and some aspects vary from CDC guideline (Taylor et al., 2014). Another literature also showed that uncertainty exists regarding the management of newborn infants with blood stream infection and central venous catheter in place (Vasudevan et al., 2016).Thus, health care system could get an idea from two research on how to improve the system to reduce risk in the hospital setting due to the use of CVC (Storey et al., 2016). From the critical analysis of a qualitative and quantitative research article, one can get an idea about the important elements of research done by respective authors. It brought into focus the problem of nurses not adhering to for the use of CVC in clinical practice and risk of infection due to antimicrobial infected PICC. The detailed evaluation of both research article helped in extracting important data on the topic that could have useful implication on future research practice. Both the research was successful in their own way to get the answer to the objective of the research. It gave new information about how health care system can act by utilizing the information and implement change in system and practices to provide safe health care delivery. Reference Becerra, M. B., Shirley, D., Safdar, N. (2016). Prevalence, risk factors, and outcomes of idle intravenous catheters: An integrative review.American Journal of Infection Control. Bertoglio, S., Faccini, B., Lalli, L., Cafiero, F., Bruzzi, P. (2016). Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) in cancer patients under chemotherapy: A prospective study on the incidence of complications and overall failures.Journal of surgical oncology,113(6), 708-714. Chopra, V., O'Horo, J. C., Rogers, M. A., Maki, D. G., Safdar, N. (2013). The risk of bloodstream infection associated with peripherally inserted central catheters compared with central venous catheters in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Infection Control Hospital Epidemiology,34(09), 908-918. Clarke, S., Collier, S. (2015). Research essentials: How to critique quantitative research.Nursing children and young people,27(9), 12-12. Craven, D. E., Craven, K. A. (2016). Vascular Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infections. InSurgical Intensive Care Medicine(pp. 389-405). Springer International Publishing. Creswell, J. W. (2014).A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Sage Publications. Howarth, D., Glynos, J., Griggs, S. (2016). Discourse, explanation and critique.Critical Policy Studies, 1-6. Howarth, D., Glynos, J., Griggs, S. (2016). Discourse, explanation and critique.Critical Policy Studies, 1-6. Jeffery, A. D., Pickler, R. H. (2014). Barriers to nurses adherence to central venous catheter guidelines.Journal of Nursing Administration,44(7/8), 429-435. MARTNEZ-MOREL, H. R., Sanchez-Pay, J., GARCA-SHIMIZU, P., MENDOZA-GARCA, J. L., Tenza-Iglesias, I., RODRGUEZ-DAZ, J. C., ... Nolasco, A. (2016). Effectiveness of a programme to reduce the burden of catheter-related bloodstream infections in a tertiary hospital.Epidemiology and infection,144(9), 2011. Mikolajczak, A., Seburn, S., Ward, S., Barra, M. (2016). Ensuring Appropriate Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) Utilization.American Journal of Infection Control,44(6), S90. Mirabel-Chambaud, E., N'Guyen, M., Valdeyron, M. L., Quessada, T., Goudable, J., Loras-Duclaux, I., ... Peretti, N. (2016). Dramatic increase of central venous catheter-related infections associated with a high turnover of the nursing team.Clinical Nutrition,35(2), 446-452. Moureau, N., Chopra, V. (2016). Indications for Peripheral, Midline, and Central Catheters: Summary of the Michigan Appropriateness Guide for Intravenous Catheters Recommendations.Journal of the Association for Vascular Access,21(3), 140-148. Smyth, W., McArdle, J., Gardner, A. (2016). Central venous catheter exit site dressings: Balancing patients' needs, nurses' experiences and the research evidence.Wound Practice Research: Journal of the Australian Wound Management Association,24(1), 41. Storey, S., Brown, J., Foley, A., Newkirk, E., Powers, J., Barger, J., Paige, K. (2016). A comparative evaluation of antimicrobial coated versus nonantimicrobial coated peripherally inserted central catheters on associated outcomes: A randomized controlled trial.American journal of infection control,44(6), 636-641. Sturm, R. E., Antonakis, J. (2015). Interpersonal Power A Review, Critique, and Research Agenda.Journal of Management,41(1), 136-163. Taylor, J. E., McDonald, S. J., Tan, K. (2014). A survey of central venous catheter practices in Australian and New Zealand tertiary neonatal units.Australian Critical Care,27(1), 36-42. Vasudevan, C., Oddie, S. J., McGuire, W. (2016). Early removal versus expectant management of central venous catheters in neonates with bloodstream infection.The Cochrane Library. Welch, C., Paavilainenà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ Mntymki, E. (2014). Putting process (back) in: research on the internationalization process of the firm.International Journal of Management Reviews,16(1), 2-23. Worth, L. J., Spelman, T., Bull, A. L., Brett, J. A., Richards, M. J. (2015). Central line-associated bloodstream infections in Australian intensive care units: Time-trends in infection rates, etiology, and antimicrobial resistance using a comprehensive Victorian surveillance program, 2009-2013.American journal of infection control,43(8), 848-852.