VAP Ventilator Associated Pneumonia: Review and Critique

VAP Ventilator Associated Pneumonia: Review and Critique of a Quantitative Research Article Ventilator associated pneumonia is a significant problem affecting many patients that are intubated during hospital stays (NIH, 2012). Understanding and addressing this problem requires careful attention to the latest research, and this research must be approached from a critical perspective.

Quantitative research, or research that directly and concretely measures certain phenomenon and describes relationships in numerical terms, has yielded no small amount of useful information on this topic, and critically examining a current article that outlines the knowledge regarding ventilator associated pneumonia is an excellent way to determine if there are any knowledge gaps or inconsistencies that require attention (Burns & Grove, 2011). The following paragraphs present just such an examination.

Problem Statement A substantial portion of patients intubated for ventilator-assisted breathing during hospital stays develop pneumonia as a result of infection spread or allowed to flourish at the intubation site (Chastre & Fogan, 2002). Though this problem was well established, the most effective means for combating it is not agreed upon, and the authors sought to address this disagreement through a careful study of current and previous findings (Chastre & Fogan, 2002).

Secondary infections such as ventilator associated pneumonia are a leading cause of extended hospital stays and even death, and are thus of paramount importance in ensuring a positive patient outcome at any healthcare institution (Chastre & Fogan, 2002). Purpose and Research Questions Chastre and Fagon (2002) explore the problem of ventilator associated pneumonia in an extensive research study that examines previous research and published clinical data, though the team did not engage in any direct observation themselves.

This quantitative study was purposed towards identifying and clarifying the best approaches to the prevention and treatment of ventilator associated pneumonia, with specific research questions focused on various treatment regimens and other institutional responses to the issue (Chastre & Fogan, 2002). All of these elements were well-focused and mutually supportive, and the quantitative method of the research is vastly superior to any qualitative assessment that could be made of the same problem.

Literature Review The author made extensive use of articles that at the time of publication were quite current; both qualitative and quantitative studies are represented in the cited literature as are certain guidelines and findings of various respected bodies within the field (Chastre & Fagon, 2002). The authors are careful to differentiate between methodologies they trust and those that they are less certain of, pointing out the strengths and weaknesses in previous studies that led them to their own conclusions in their own quantitative assessment of published results (Chastre & Fagon, 2002).

All of the information contained in the review of literature that these authors conducted was logically on-point, and supported their own quantitative assessment in a straightforward and concrete manner (Chastre & Fagon, 2002). Conceptual/Theoretical Framework The authors do not define or describe a specific conceptual or theoretical approach to their research, but rather used a simple evidence-based best practices approach without labeling it as such to determine the most effective means for addressing the problem ventilator associated pneumonia (Chastre & Fagon, 2002).

An ultimate conclusion about the best practices to use does emerge, and this is based on certain technical and theoretical issues having to do with the specifics of ventilator associated pneumonia infections and their acquisition, but this hardly serves as a framework surrounding and informing the research itself (Chastre & Fogan, 2002). Similarly, no real framework was developed at the conclusion of the study or as a.