Effects of nursing rounds on patient care and satisfaction: A quantitative research critique

Nursing

Effects of Nursing Rounds on Patient's Call Light Use, Satisfaction, and Safety

A Quantitative Research Critique

The research process involves different phases and activities which researchers engage in to be able to obtain knowledge. The methodology, i.e. The stipulated rules and procedures in which a research is based, can be classified as either quantitative (which has an inductive approach and aims to achieve in-depth understanding of the subject matter's lived realities and experiences) and quantitative (which aims to generalize and detect patterns to be able to predict future occurrences) (Hunt, n.d.; Nachmias & Nachmias, 1996).

This article is directed towards a critical understanding of the quantitative research process. For this purpose, we shall be utilizing the 2006 work of Meade, Bursell, & Ketelsen on the effects of nursing rounds to patient care. We will critically look into the work's structure and different parts and how they function in order to achieve the main objective of the study.

Introduction

According to Nachmias & Nachmias (1996), the introduction of a research work should clearly and briefly state the main purpose of writing the report. Instead of clearly defining the problem of the study and its research goals in the introduction, the authors proceeded with the review of literature. Hence, the burden of the fulfilling the functions of the introduction fell on the abstract portion. But we should understand that an abstract cannot in any way act as substitute for the introduction. In fact, this is a common misconception among researchers and report writers (Ebert, n.d.) which, as can be observed, our case under scrutiny is guilty of.

What is also lacking in the introduction is its ability to hold the interest of the reader. There is a room for a more creative writing style, especially in the opening statement.

Literature Review

The strategy used by the authors is to present the literature review in the introduction which was then directed towards the establishment of the research problem, which is 'Can a systematic, nursing-only rounding protocol that anticipates patients' needs result in better patient care management?" (Meade, Bursell, Ketelsen, 2006, p.59). Indeed, the introduction (which is functionally its literature review as well) provided a lot of details about the research problem.

Since the literature review was able to show the research gap in the subject matter's domain, it was able to successfully establish its significance. Using secondary research sources, the literature review pointed out the questions that are still left unanswered in the nursing literature. However, the literature review is a bit scanty. This probably owes to the fact that the review was a focused literature review. It could have been better had the authors presented a broad literature review until it narrowed down to the literature review on the chosen topic. In this way, readers can see a more expanded view of the subject matter and the readers will be able to better situate the research problem in terms of the larger and broader scheme of existing research works and findings. Through a broad to narrowed-down literature review, readers will also be able to see the many directions that nursing literature has taken.

Ethical Considerations

In research, particular processes may involve not only scientific but ethical considerations as well. These ethical issues largely depend on the kinds of research problem that the researcher aims to investigate (Nachmias & Nachmias, 1996). Although this particular study is conducted in the domain of healthcare, there is not much risk involved in the process.

Although the unit of analysis in this study is the hospital institution, the RNs, CNAs, LPNs, patient care assistants, and patient care technicians were required to perform specific action (protocols such as assessing pain levels, put medication on RN's scheduled list, offer toileting assistance, assess patient's position and comfort, make sure call light is within the patient's reach, to name a few) during patient interface. Hospital patients were also asked to fill out survey forms which measured their satisfaction levels.

There are no perceived violations of ethics in this study as the participants are well-informed of the dynamics of this study. The authors first talked to the nurse managers of the hospitals regarding the study. These nurse managers then convinced their staff to participate in the study.

Findings and Conclusion

Results of the study showed that the first hypothesis was verified. Indeed, rounding wherein the nursing staff performed specific (prescribed) actions resulted to lower patient call lights use. Patient satisfaction also increased during the performance of these rounding protocols. Patient falls were also reduced during the experimental rounding.

The contribution of this study to what is known about nursing practices, or medical practices by and large, is undeniable. However, it is a fact that most (if not all) research works have their strengths and weakness.

One of the major strengths of this work lies on its ability to fill the research gaps in nursing literature. The study offers a new, fresher perspective to the way we understand patient satisfaction for example, or the way we view the rather mundane task of doing nursing rounds.

However, as the authors themselves have stated, limitations of this study include the research design used. Although the quasi-experimental design perfectly suited the objectives of the study, some fieldwork glitches were still sustained. The equivalence of the groups was not ensured because the researchers were not able to account for all the specific factors the hospital managers considered in assigning the one-hour and two-our rounding control groups. Secondly, there was no way of ensuring that the protocols issued by the researchers for implementation were performed as prescribed.

As a form of summary, this quantitative research critique analyzed the structure and details of the Effects of Nursing Rounds work by Meade, Bursell, & Ketelsen (2006) and readers have seen that the research structure deviates from the rather rigid research report flow dictated by traditional researchers (see Nachmias & Nachmias, 2006). The utility of this research work is its ability to show that there is a lot more room for creativity in the way research reports are written. Although it fell short on some of the details expected in the introduction and literature review as well as it has some perceived limitations in fieldwork which implicated the research design, the contribution in the nursing practice made by the findings of this study is quite promising. Not only does it increase our discursive understanding of the variables tested, but it also gives readers concrete ideas on the ways and means by which patient satisfaction and safety can be improved, in the hope that this can contribute to widely-recognized medical practices.