Analyzing Published Research Paper
Analyzing Published Research
Health care organizations experience different health problems that vary depending on patients’ demographics, locations, vulnerabilities, and other factors. Regardless of the situation, it is crucial to assess the problems comprehensively and ensure that interventions match patient needs. Evidence-based interventions are highly recommended in the current practice since they apply present and relevant evidence to guide decision-making. A thorough search and appraisal of peer-reviewed articles generate appropriate evidence for a clinical question. The purpose of this paper is to interpret two articles on reducing the incidence of hospital-acquired pneumonia.
Health care organizations cannot underestimate the impacts of hospital-acquired infections (HAIs). Accordingly, reducing the incidence of any hospital-acquired infection should be prioritized in health care delivery (Caselli et al., 2018). The concern is the incidence of hospital-acquired pneumonia in patients admitted in the hospital within two to three days. Due to the criticality of the problem, the focus is on reducing the incidence of hospital-acquired pneumonia through evidence-based practices. Hospital-acquired pneumonia can be ventilator-associated (VAP) or non-ventilator-associated (nvHAP). In any case, the impacts are profound and regrettable from a health dimension since hospital-acquired pneumonia affects health outcomes adversely. It is among the health concerns requiring a collaborative approach besides evidence-based interventions.
Struggling to meet your deadline ?
Get assistance on
Analyzing Published Research Paper
done on time by medical experts. Don’t wait – ORDER NOW!
Hospital-acquired pneumonia is a significant problem due to its high prevalence and compound impacts. Recent studies reveal that VAP is the leading HAI in intensive care units (ICUs) in the United States (Damas et al., 2022). If health care organizations fail to intervene appropriately, hospital-acquired pneumonia can extend hospital stays, increase medical expenses, and make patients more vulnerable to other health problems. Extended hospital stays and high medical expenses increase the overall health care costs. Rosario et al. (2021) further found that the mortality rate related to hospital-acquired pneumonia is as high as 33-50% in ICUs. The elderly are at a higher risk than other populations.
Data Interpretation/Synthesis of Literature
This paper primarily focuses on data interpretation from two articles on reducing the incidence of hospital-acquired pneumonia. As summarized in the appendices (Appendix A), the two articles vary in design, variables, and data collection methods, among other elements. However, a lot can be deduced regarding reducing hospital-associated pneumonia incidence using pneumonia prevention bundles and other evidence-based approaches. Damas et al. (2022) hypothesized that a noble metal coating of endotracheal tubes could significantly reduce ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) incidence in intensive care units. The dependent variable was VAP incidence, and the independent variable was the noble metal coating of endotracheal tubes. In the other study, Rosario et al. (2021) hypothesized that multi-component interventions would significantly reduce the incidence of hospital-acquired pneumonia during hospitalization and subsequent hospitalization for respiratory infections. The dependent variable was hospital-acquired pneumonia, and the multi-component interventions were the independent variable.
Research studies vary in designs, procedures, and participants depending on their objectives and research problems. Both studies are quantitative, implying that data is provided in numbers. Damas et al. (2022) recorded multiple data within 48 hours after intubation and twice a week during ventilation. On the other hand, Rosario et al. (2021) followed up patients via telephone surveys and analyzed data in electronic medical records to evaluate the effectiveness of multi-component interventions. In research, a high confidence level is achieved when results reflect the entire population’s opinions. It is the same case with these studies. Damas et al. (2022) analyzed all the patients allocated in the experimental and control groups. Rosario et al. (2021) lost only six patients in the follow-up by telephone, but the relevant measures were obtained from the electronic records.
Participants, Instruments, and Findings
Regarding participants, Damas et al. (2022) randomized ventilated patients from selected (nine) ICUs from four Belgian hospitals. All were above 18 years. On the other hand, Rosario et al. (20210 randomized elder adults (median age, 85) admitted to a tertiary hospital geriatric unit. Experimentation implies that researchers collected first-hand information in each study, indicating high reliability and validity of the methods and instruments used. Data recording during experimentation, telephone surveys, and electronic medical records help researchers to collect timely and accurate data from a large population.
The research findings provide evidence to support the clinical problem in each case. Damas et al. (2022) found that VPA was higher (11.6%) in the control group than in the NMA-coated group (6.5%). As a result, strategies focusing on inhibiting contamination of devices during ventilation should be a central part of prevention bundles. In the other study, the incidence of hospital-acquired pneumonia was 1.7% in patients receiving multi-component interventions and 4.7% in patients receiving usual care (Rosario et al., 2021). A multi-component intervention was found effective in reducing hospital-acquired pneumonia, although not significantly.
Next Steps/Implications for Future Work
Hospital-acquired pneumonia adversely impacts patient outcomes. Pneumonia prevention bundles have been effective in reducing the incidence of hospital-acquired pneumonia. Two questions should guide the group’s work and lay the foundation for future practice. The first area that needs explicit answers is the effectiveness of prevention bundles compared with other strategies. The second area is whether other procedures can be included in prevention bundles to make them more effective in reducing the incidence of hospital-acquired pneumonia.
Hospital-acquired pneumonia adversely impacts care quality and increases health care costs. Research to reduce its incidence is extensive and focuses on different areas. Analyzing the two articles illustrates how research varies in hypothesis, populations, and methods, among other elements. Despite the variations, the effectiveness of different methods is evident. The effectiveness of single or multi-component methods shows how prevention bundles can be used independently or other methods to reduce hospital-acquired pneumonia incidence.
Caselli, E., Brusaferro, S., Coccagna, M., Arnoldo, L., Berloco, F., Antonioli, P., …& SAN-ICA Study Group. (2018). Reducing healthcare-associated infections incidence by a probiotic-based sanitation system: A multicentre, prospective, intervention study. PLoS One, 13(7), e0199616. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0199616
Damas, P., Legrain, C., Lambermont, B., Dardenne, N., Guntz, J., Kisoka, G., …&Misset, B. (2022). Prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia by noble metal coating of endotracheal tubes: A multi-center, randomized, double-blind study. Annals of Intensive Care, 12(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13613-021-00961-y
Rosario, B. H., Shafi, H., Yii, A. C., Tee, L. Y., Ang, A. S., Png, G. K., … &Taha, A. A. (2021). Evaluation of multi-component interventions for prevention of nosocomial pneumonia in older adults: A randomized, controlled trial. European Geriatric Medicine, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41999-021-00506-3
Appendix A: Evidence Matrix Table
|1||Damas, P., Legrain, C., Lambermont, B., Dardenne, N., Guntz, J., Kisoka, G., …&Misset, B. (2022). Prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia by noble metal coating of endotracheal tubes: a multi-center, randomized, double-blind study. Annals of Intensive Care, 12(1), 1-10.||Noble metal coating of endotracheal tubes can significantly reduce ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) incidence in intensive care units.|| D- VAP incidence
I- noble metal coating of endotracheal tubes
|Quantitative|| N- 323 patients
|Data recording in charts.||VPA was higher (11.6%) in the control group than NMA-coated group (6.5%).|
|2||Rosario, B. H., Shafi, H., Yii, A. C., Tee, L. Y., Ang, A. S., Png, G. K., … &Taha, A. A. (2021). Evaluation of multi-component interventions for prevention of nosocomial pneumonia in older adults: a randomized, controlled trial. European Geriatric Medicine, 1-11.||Multi-component intervention would significantly reduce the incidence of hospital-acquired pneumonia during hospitalization and subsequent hospitalization for respiratory infections.|| D- Hospital-acquired pneumonia incidence
I- Multi-component intervention
|Quantitative|| N- 123 patients
|Telephone surveys and electronic medical records|| Multi-component interventions reduced (but not significantly) the incidence of hospital-acquired infections and subsequent hospitalizations for respiratory infections.
Incidence- 1.7% in patients receiving the multi-component interventions and 4.7% in patients receiving usual care
The purpose of this paper is to interpret the two articles identified as most important to the group topic. Damas, P., Legrain, C., Lambermont, B., Dardenne, N., Guntz, J., Kisoka, G., …&Misset, B. (2022). Prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia by noble metal coating of endotracheal tubes: A multi-center, randomized, double-blind study. Annals of Intensive Care, 12(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13613-021-00961-y ; Rosario, B. H., Shafi, H., Yii, A. C., Tee, L. Y., Ang, A. S., Png, G. K., … &Taha, A. A. (2021). Evaluation of multi-component interventions for prevention of nosocomial pneumonia in older adults: A randomized, controlled trial. European Geriatric Medicine, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41999-021-00506-3 . This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeClinical Question
1. Describe the problem: What is the focus of your groupâ€™s work?
2. Significance of problem: What health outcomes result from your problem? Or what statistics document this is a problem? You may find support on websites for government or professional organizations.
3. Purpose of the paper: What will your paper do or describe? This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEvidence Matrix Table: Data Summary (Appendix A)
Categorize items in the Matrix Table, including proper intext citations and reference list entries for each article.
1. References (recent publication within the last 5 years)
2. Purpose/Hypothesis/Study Question(s)
3. Variables: Independent (I) and Dependent (D)
4. Study Design
5. Sample Size and Selection
6. Data Collection Methods
7. Major Findings (Evidence) This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescription of Findings
Describe the data in the Matrix Table, including proper intext citations and reference list entries for each article.
1. Compare and contrast variables within each study.
2. What are the study design and procedures used in each study; qualitative, quantitative, or mixed method study, levels of confidence in each study, etc.?
3. Participant demographics and information.
4. Instruments used, including reliability and validity.
5. How do the research findings provide evidence to support your clinical problem, or what further evidence is needed to answer your question?
6. Next steps: Identify two questions that can help guide the groupâ€™s work. This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConclusion
Review major findings in a summary paragraph.
1. Evidence to address your clinical problem.
2. Make a connection back to all the included sections.
3. Wrap up the assignment and give the reader something to think about. This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFormat
1. Correct grammar and spelling
2. Include a title and reference page
3. Use of headings for each section:
o Synthesis of the Literature
ï‚§ Implications for Future Work
5. Adheres to current APA formatting and guidelines
6. Includes at least two (2) scholarly, current (within 5 years) primary sources other than the textbook
7. 3-4 pages in length excluding appendices, title and reference pages.