SU Limitations and Strengths

Evaluate the discussion section

of the article attached and identify if the following was addressed.

(Note, you need to show evidence, do not just say yes or no. Post what

the researcher indicated that supports that these elements were

addressed in the discussion section. Add the page number where you found

them)

a) limitations and strengths of the study variable(s)

b)hypothesis(es)/research questions

c) theoretical framework

d) design

e) sample

f) data
collection procedures

g) data analysis

h)generalizations

i)conclusions

j)recommendations for future research

2. After reviewing and evaluating the “Discussion” section of the article, discuss the strength of the evidence supports a change in current practice
(If you think it does, support your answer with evidence based
literature. You describe what the article indicated and find another
source to support why the strength of evidence support a change in
current practice).

3. What is your cosmic question?
(This should be based on chapter of the week. Pose a research question
on discussion section of a research)

Initial Post Due: Thursday 11-25-21 by 2359. Respond by: Saturday 11-27-21 by 2359 to two of your class mate

RESPOND 1

1. limitations and strengths of the study
variable(s):
Alderden, et al.,
(2020), identified multiple limitations related to their study, mainly by form
of documentation by the EHR and the interpretation of data by the nurses
reviewing the charts (Alderden, et al., 2020, p. e133). There are possible
variables that are not able to be obtained from the EHR, such as possible
prevention protocols because of the fact that there could be possible false
documentation (Alderden, et al., 2020, p. e133). Alderden et al. (2020), point
out that the interpretation of data varies among nurse and their perception of
a particular topic can vary from nurse to nurse (Alderden, et al., 2020, p.
e133). Another limitation is that the majority of the population in their study
consisted of the white population (Alderden, et al., 2020, p. e133).

2. hypothesis(es)/research questions: There was no stated hypothesis or research
question. However, they state their purpose of the study was to identify
factors related to healthcare associated pressure injuries in surgical critical
care patients (Alderden, et al., 2020, p. e129).

3. theoretical framework: I was unable to identify a theoretical
framework in this article.

4. design: They state that their design is a retrospective cohort study
(Alderden, et al., 2020, p. e129).

5. sample: The sample size of the study is identified in the study as 5101
patients in a level 1 trauma center (Alderden, et al., 2020, p. e128).

6. data collection procedures: Data for this study was taken by reviewing
their electronic health records, specifically, they used a biometrics team as
well as nurses to manually review charts (Alderden, et al., 2020, p. e129). The
biometrics team isolated data for patients who’ve had multiple encounters or
admissions and after data collection, a critical care nurse was assigned to
verify information using date and time stamps in the chart (Alderden, et al.,
2020, p. e129). Following the review from a critical care nurse, another
critical care nurse and a certified wound care nurse manually reviewed these
charts to review any other data that was missing or doubtful (Alderden, et al.,
2020, p. e129).

7. data analysis: The analysis section identified the various
methods of coming to a conclusion with the data. Alderden, et al., (2020), used
R Foundation for Statistical Computing to compare the various potential factors
related to the healthcare associated pressure injuries by using an x2 test for
categorical factors and the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous and ordinal
variable (Alderden, et al., 2020, p. e130). They also used a selection operator
known as the LASSO, to determine other specified potential predictors for predicting
the chances of a healthcare associated pressure injury developing (Alderden, et
al., 2020, p. e130).

8. generalizations: A generalization I was able to identify was
the comparison of longer surgical times associated with patients with HAPI’s,
to patients who had shorter surgical times (Alderden, et al., 2020, p. e132). Alderden,
et al. (2020), pointed out that there is little known about the factors
associated with HAPI during surgery (Alderden, et al., 2020, p. e132).

9. conclusions: They concluded that nurses should be cognizant
of changes in the epidermal layer, as it plays a major role in HAPI’s (Alderden,
et al., 2020, p. e133).

10. recommendations for future research: Their recommendations in future research include identifying the
relationships in tissue perfusion, surgical times and HAPI risk (Alderden, et
al., 2020, p. e133).

11. After reviewing and evaluating the “Discussion”
section of the article, discuss the strength of the evidence supports a
change in current practice (If you think it does, support your answer with
evidence-based literature. You describe what the article indicated and find
another source to support why the strength of evidence support a change in
current practice).
Alderden, et al.
(2020), note that the strongest predictor of HAPIs were skin irritants which causes
decreased skin integrity by mechanical or shearing forces (Alderden, et al.,
2020, p. e132). Relaying back to their conclusion, they advise that nurses
should monitor changes in the skin that are prominent in risk for HAPI
(Alderden, et al., 2020, p. e133). Cooper, et al. (2020), note that frequent
skin assessments are important in identify factors related to pressure to
remove any device or reposition devices for prevention of pressure related
injuries (Cooper, et al., 2020, p. 152). This supports the evidence by reassuring
the need to continuing to monitor skin integrity caused by chemical or
mechanical materials.

12. What is your cosmic question? (This should be
based on chapter of the week. Pose a research question on discussion section of
a research)
What descriptive
statistics are you able to identify from the article? Which level of measurement
is evident from the article?


Reference

Alderden,
J., Cowan, L. J., Dimas, J.B., Chen, D., Zhang, Y., Cummins, M. & Yap, T.L.
(2020).

Hospital-acquired pressure injury
in surgical critical care patients. American Journal of Critical Care, 29(6),
p. e128-e134. https://doi.org/10.4037/ajcc2020810

Cooper,
K.D., McQueen, K.M., Halm, M.A. & Flayter, R. (2020). Prevention and
treatment of

device-related hospital-acquired pressure
injuries. American Journal of Critical Care, 29(2), p. 150-154. https://doi.org/10.4037/ajcc2020167

SU Limitations and Strengths

Evaluate the discussion section

of the article attached and identify if the following was addressed.

(Note, you need to show evidence, do not just say yes or no. Post what

the researcher indicated that supports that these elements were

addressed in the discussion section. Add the page number where you found

them)

a) limitations and strengths of the study variable(s)

b)hypothesis(es)/research questions

c) theoretical framework

d) design

e) sample

f) data
collection procedures

g) data analysis

h)generalizations

i)conclusions

j)recommendations for future research

2. After reviewing and evaluating the “Discussion” section of the article, discuss the strength of the evidence supports a change in current practice
(If you think it does, support your answer with evidence based
literature. You describe what the article indicated and find another
source to support why the strength of evidence support a change in
current practice).

3. What is your cosmic question?
(This should be based on chapter of the week. Pose a research question
on discussion section of a research)

Initial Post Due: Thursday 11-25-21 by 2359. Respond by: Saturday 11-27-21 by 2359to 2 people

RESPOND 1

a) Limitations and strengths of the study variables

In the study carried out by Alderden et al., (2020)., the limitations and strengths were all addressed in the study. For instance, the study was limited to the retrospective design as the data accessed was only available in the EHR. Also, the other factors that can result in PI amongst the patients are not covered by the selected populations (Alderden et al., 2020).

b) Hypothesis/research question

The hypothesis is that reduced mobility and surgery duration, amongst other factors, result in pressure injuries amongst hospitalized patients (Alderden et al., 2020).

c) Theoretical framework

The framework for the study that prompts the research is that decreased mobility and altered perfusion are likely to result in pressure injuries (Alderden et al., 2020).

d) Design

The designs and methods of the study were addressed in the discussion of the article (Alderden et al.2020). The design used in the study is the retrospective cohort study (Alderden et al., 2020).

e) Sample

The sample was covered in the discussion. A sample of patients in the surgical ICU and a total of 5102 were studied (Alderden et al., 2020).

f)Data collection procedures

The data collection procedure used in the study includes retrieving information from the institution’s enterprise data warehouse for critical care data (Alderden et al., 2020).

g) Data analysis

Data analysis was carried out in the study using the R foundation for statistical sampling. The HAPI potential distribution factors were analyzed to identify variables that are more prone in resulting to HAPI (Alderden et al., 2020).

h) Generalizations

In the article, some generalizations were made. One was to consider changes in the epidermal layer to reduce skin irritation. Also further studies need to be conducted to find out the relationship between perfusion, intraoperative events, and HAPI risk (Alderden et al., 2020).

i)Conclusions

The study has a conclusion. The conclusion from the study is that skin irritation is the risk factor of patients in the hospital developing HAPI, and therefore the caregivers should treat any factor that results in skin irritation amongst the patients.

j)Recommendations for future research

There is no recommendation for future research in the study.

2. From the study discussion, the early identification and understanding of the risk factors that present hospitalized patients to develop pressure injuries are significant amongst the healthcare workers in the hospital when managing patients. Some of the factors identified in the article include prolonged hospital stay and skin irritation (Alderden et al.2020). The study is relevant because longer stay on the bed is associated with decreased mobility, which means constant pressure on the skin results in bedsores.

3. my comic question is, “What is the significance of using a retrospective study approach in research?”

References

Alderden, J., Cowan, L. J., Dimas, J. B., Chen, D., Zhang, Y., Cummins, M., & Yap, T. L. (2020). Risk factors for hospital-acquiredpressure injury in surgicalcritical care patients. American Journal of Critical Care, 29(6), e128-e134.

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount