April Wound and Ostomy Journal
Feasibility and acceptability of implementing a patient education pressure injury prevention care bundle in acute care: an Interview study
Please Click the Link below:
Please follow Journal Rules and Guidelines before posting.If not automatically directed on the PDF file just click Download PDF file on the Headings tab.
Don't forget to write your name with each posting.
1. Describe the method used by the author of this study.
ReplyDeleteThe author used a descriptive qualitative study through conducting semi-structured patient interviews and nurse focus groups in three medical units of a metropolitan hospital in Australia.
2. Discuss the limitations of the article: limited sample size, design flaws, and/or author bias.
Per the author, the limitations are as follows:
The generalisability of the findings were limited because the study was conducted on a single medical ward. Another limitation was the participants consisted mostly of female nurses so the perceptions of male nurses were under represented.
Discuss the sample size used in the study:
ReplyDelete- The sample size of Patients were ten and the participated nurses were twenty. According to Mira Crouch and Heather McKenzie ("The logic of small samples in interview-based qualitative research"), it's better to keep fewer than 20 participants for a qualitative research study gives better data. However, interviewing 20 nurses with different role/experiences revealed their honest and unique opinions as well as interviews from 10 patients. Thus the sample size of this research is appropriate.
Was the correct method used? Why or why not?
- An interview-based descriptive qualitative method was correct for this study because the result revealed an interesting finding; the different experiences of PIP education on admission between patients and nurses. Both sides wish to have more time and resources for PIP education. From the voices of the participated nurses, heavy nurse workloads and limited access to patient education interfere education time for patient. As for Patients, increased level of stressful situation due to unwell and/or separation from familial environment/support system interfere their active participation for the education. Because most of the patients in ICU are either confused or decreased level of consciousness, Patient education is often challenging for us. Therefore, I do agree to use Patient's family or care taker for patient education instead as the participated nurses's suggestion. Since we provide primary nursing on top of a high acuity for many patients, workload pressures/heavy workloads can be sky-high. I wish our education materials would have variety like this article and easy to accessible for printable resources to customize care.
Describe the method used by author of this study.
ReplyDeleteThe method used was semi-structured patient interviews and nurse focus groups were conducted in the three medical units in Australia metropolitan hospital. All data was gathered on participants experienced PIP education on hospital admission and their views of implementing PPIPCB.
What was the advantage and disadvantages of implementing this article.
Patient reported receiving limited education from nurses because nurses had heavy workload preventing nurses to have time to educate patients. The advantage was that the patients and nurses liked PIP education, but wanted to have more time and resources. Both nurses and patients reported useful in education.
:
Jennifer O'Neill
ReplyDeleteDiscuss the sample size used in the study.
per the article the sample size was at a large metropolitan hospital in Australia on a 28 bed adult acute medical unit. Patients involved in study were over age 18 and hospitalized for greater than 48 hrs, and they were all consented.
Describe the method used by the author of the study
ReplyDeleteThe method used was a patient semi structured interviews. The patients were asked to consent to study. Pt were asked questions about the PIP education they received. Questions about the information and strategies were discussed.
Describe the method used by the author of the study
ReplyDeleteThe type of study used by the author was a qualitative study in a Australia’s Metropolitan hospital. Done by conducting semi-structured interviews, and nurse focus groups to gather information for their study. Data was gathered on participants’ experiences of Pressure injury prevention education on hospital admission and their views of the acceptability of implementing a patient education pressure injury prevention care bundle.
Describe the Limitations of the study
The author states that limitations were based on the study being done in one medical hospital only, and the use of mainly female nurses as their participations which did not represent the male nurses.
Discuss the sample size used in the study.
Patients and nurses from the three wards were recruited once to the study. The sample size of the study was 10 patients, and 20 nurses with the use of interview-based questions, and focus groups. .
Was the correct method used? Why or Why Not?
The study itself did use the correct method, however I felt that due to the limitations and a small sample size not everyone’s views can be represented. Especially since the hospital used three different units with 28 beds each, and a total of 20 nurses. How many nurses were pulled from each of those units? Due to the lack of representations of male nurses also could they have gotten a better representation of each unit. So even with the good results, the study could have been greater if they used a bigger sample size.
Describe the method used by the author of the study.
ReplyDeleteThe author chose to use a qualitative study in a Metropolitan Hospital in Australia. The study was done using focus groups, and set of questions for semi-structured interviews to gather their data. Data was based on participants experiences of pressure injury prevent education, and their views on implementing a bundle for pressure injury education.
Discuss the sample size used in the study.
A total of 10 patients, and 20 nurses were asked to partake in the study, and the were all conducted in an interview with semi-structured questions.
Discuss the sample size used in the study and discuss the limitations of the article: limited sample size, design flaws, and/or author bias.
ReplyDeleteThe sample size of this study consisted of both patients and nurse from three different 28 bed acute medical units in a large metropolitan Australian hospital. Patient inclusion required consent for ages 18 and up and were also being hospitalized for greater than or equal to 48 hours. Patient on end-of-life care or palliative care were excluded from the study. For the results, nine patients were interviewed, 7 of them being female and of the nurses, 20 participated in the three focus groups, where again the majority were female (15 out of 20). The limitations of this study include the lack of a large sample size, lack of equal male to female ratio that were studied, and that the study was only done in one location within Australia
What are the advantages and disadvantages of implementing the articles recommendations in the article?
ReplyDeleteThe advantages of implementing a patient education pressure injury prevention care bundle would be that patients could participate in their own care and help themselves from developing wounds. By patient’s being educated on PIP, they hopefully would be more willing to be mobile and want to turn/get out of bed. On many accounts, patients refuse to be turned or get out of bed with PT, but if they are properly education on PIP I believe it could help drastically lower HAPIs. Some disadvantages would be patients not willing or wanting to learn about PIP. As mentioned in the article, the pictures of injuries could be unappealing or upsetting to patients.
Discuss the limitations in the article.
There were a few limitations in this article. First, the study was conducted only in three units in one Australian hospital. Secondly, females were largely included in the study, so there are not many male perspectives leading to possible bias. Also, in the focus groups, speaking time was not equally given to everyone, so some voices and opinions could have been more represented than quieter participants.