The possession of skills to help critically appraise quantitative research continue to be an area of significance for the health care workers. Understanding quantitative research can help boost knowledge in various clinical practice areas: hence, this report provides a critical appraisal of a quantitative research article. The report covers many areas, including study design, data collection, sample size, analysis, and reliability.
Is this quantitative research report a case study, case-control study, cohort study, randomized control trial, or systematic review?
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The quantitative research is a systematic review. It presents numerical data derived from interviews and questionnaires to derive the meanings. In this study, “the researchers review the patients' medical records and the Swedish Palliative Registry to derive the findings.” The questionnaires are also presented to the participants from which the data is obtained about the research questions. In systematic reviews, the researchers utilize an organized method to locate and assemble data used for interpretations. Through this systematic collection of data, the researchers were able to determine the pain management efforts at palliative care.
Where does the study fall in the hierarchy of evidence in terms of reliability and risk of bias?
The study is a level I research of the hierarchy of evidence due to minimized bias and increased evidence. In the study, the data is obtained from at least a designed randomized controlled trial. The study is more objective, focusing on specific results and the research question. The high levels of objectivity minimize the risk of bias and increase the research findings' level of evidence. The researchers obtained the data through a well-organized procedure that leads to more reliable and accurate data, thus increasing the evidence of the findings. The study methodology plays a significant role in determining the validity and proof of the results.
Why was the study done? (Define the problem and purpose.)
The study aimed to determine the role of evidence-based measurement tools to improve the management of pain in palliative care. Pain management in palliative care remains one of the most crucial but challenging areas for care providers. Pain is a critical symptom in palliative care. Therefore, optimal pain management needs detailed analysis and the use of a variety of methods and skills. There is a need to have a care system that utilizes optimal pain management. However, this remains a challenge for healthcare providers. Therefore, the study seeks to present evidence-based procedures that can provide the best system to manage pain.
Were the steps of the study identified?
The study clearly states the steps used to reach the findings. First, the researchers report the study design, which uses statistical and quantifiable results. The investigation began in September 2012 to April 2013, “where two teams from a specific health care district in north-eastern Sween with 177,000 people were selected” ( Unné & Rosengren, 2014 ). Besides, the researchers mention every step of data collection, analysis, and discussion. All this provides a clear procedure ad steps used to conduct the study. The data collection procedure involved three different categories: staff members, Swedish Palliative Registry, and patients' medical records.
What was the sample size?
The sample included 22 workers in palliative care. The staff was presented with questionnaires which they were to answer in 14 days. Besides, a sample of the data from the medical record of the patients was collected from the registry. In this, “46 patients' records from team South and 62 from team North records were used” ( Unné & Rosengren, 2014 ). Also, 20 items were obtained from the Register to get the death questionnaire statistics. Therefore, the whole study was categorized into three, each with different sample size.
Are the measurements of significant variables reliable and valid? Explain .
The measurements of the variables were both reliable and valid. A reliable measure shows consistency in the results over time, while a valid instrument measures the exact and right thing it is supposed to measure. The numerical rating scale and verbal rating scales measured the pain for the documentation of pain management. These instruments measure the pain, which makes them valid tools. The assessment of pain through documentation and pain management activities provides a consistent measure of pain over time, which makes it a reliable measure of pain.
How were the data analyzed?
The analysis occurred by descriptive statistics through Microsoft Excel for the nine questions on the differences and similarities between pain management. The analysis was through the proportional presentation of the findings. The percentages provided a clear view of the findings in a proportionate form. For the “documentation of pain management, the analysis was mainly done by reviewing the medical records using the VRS” ( Unné & Rosengren, 2014 ). The p-chart, which is a statistical process control chart, was used to analyze the data obtained from the registry. During the analysis, the researchers compared the number of registered death questionnaires with the number of pain estimation.
Were there any untoward events during the conduct of the study?
The research does not have any identified untoward events that could have existed during the study to affect the findings. However, the researchers only refer to the study limitations that could have affected the outcome of the study. The study was only conducted in one health care district and then used to conclude all other regions. Focusing on a single district fails to take into account that the outcome could also be affected by differences in settings.
How do the results fit with previous research in the area? (This may be reflected in the literature review.)
This study fits into previous research on areas of palliative pain management. Previous studies have focused on the role of nurses in pain management in palliative care. Also, the survey of the part of quantitative pain management tools has gained importance in the past. The study aimed at identifying how the methods of estimation of pain in palliative care differ from each other. It makes it fit within the previous research. The literature review part of the study identifies the earlier studies in this area.
What does this research mean to clinical practice? Additionally, be sure to include the rapid appraisal questions for the specific research design of the quantitative study that you have chosen.
This research can apply in the clinical practice by care providers working in the palliative care setting. The findings are essential to the care providers in managing pain, which is a significant challenge for most care providers. Using numbers instead of words can best provide effective pain management activities in palliative care.
Rapid Appraisal Questions
Is there validity of the results contained in the review?
Are the validity of each of the studies reviewed assessed?
Are the results presented show consistency throughout?
Are the data of the patients utilized in the analysis section?
How will the results assist me in my practice?
Is there a similarity between my patients and the ones studied?
Can the findings be feasibly implemented in my practice?
Conclusion
The quantitative research article provides clear findings on the pain management systems within the palliative care setting. Through a quantitative data collection and analysis techniques, the researchers present useful outcomes for the clinical practice. The results, especially the use of numbers in pain management, can be used by care providers in palliative care.
Reference
Unné, A., & Rosengren, K. (2014). Using numbers creates value for health professionals: a quantitative study of pain management in palliative care. Pharmacy , 2 (3), 205-221.
