The article I chose is:
Li, Z., Marshall, A. P., Lin, F., Ding, Y., & Chaboyer, W. (2022). Registered nurses’ approach to pressure injury prevention: A descriptive qualitative study. Journal of advanced nursing, 78(8), 2575-2585. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.15218
The study I would be focusing on for the purpose of this discussion is, how to pressure injuries are prevented in the clinical setting. This is a qualitative study because participants were asked to share their perception on what the causes and prevention of pressure ulcers are. The study methodology is phenomenology because participants’ perceptions and approach to pressure injury prevention were explored. Phenomenology can be defined as an approach to research that seeks to describe the essence of a phenomenon by exploring it from the perspective of those who have experienced it. This approach investigates the everyday experiences of human beings while suspending the researchers’ preconceived assumptions about the phenomenon. (Ho & Limpaecher, 2022)
CASP Qualitative Checklist:
- Clear statement of the aims of the research? Yes, the researchers explored Registered Nurses’ approaches to pressure injury prevention, including how they perceive their roles, how they prioritize pressure injury prevention and factors influencing prevention.
- Qualitative methodology appropriate? Yes, the System Engineering initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model was used to guide the development of an interview guide and the data analysis method. The 32-item checklist of the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies (COREQ) was adopted to guide reporting of this study.
- Research design appropriate to address the aims of the research? Yes, the design was appropriate as the study was conducted RNs’ perceptions and ways of preventing pressure injuries.
- Recruitment strategy appropriate to the aims of the research? Yes, the strategy was appropriate because Registered Nurses (RNs) were recruited from two medical and two surgical wards because these wards had a higher number of patients who required higher levels of nursing care. Again, nurses were invited because of their roles, years of clinical experience in their current position, and whether they had specific pressure injury training or not.
- Data collected in a way that addressed the research issue? Yes, data collection methods were appropriate because all individual interviews were audio-recorded with the nurses’ permission and lasted between 15 and 55 mins. Nurses were also interviewed in private and quiet locations.
- Relationship between researcher and participants considered? Yes, the authors took into consideration their relationship by explaining the main aim of the study and obtained informed consent from the participants.
- Ethical issues have been taken into consideration? Yes, ethical issues were addressed, and consents were obtained before the study began.
- Data analysis sufficiently rigorous? Yes, nurses’ demographic and professional data were entered in SPSS (version 26.0; IBM Corp.). Descriptive statistics were used to describe numerical data. Interview data were managed in NVivo 11 (version 11; QSR International). To preserve the original meanings of the interview, the data analysis was conducted using the original Chinese transcripts.
- Clear statement of findings? Yes, the findings clearly stated that their results showed that nurses lead and coordinate pressure injury prevention. They strive to do their best in pressure injury prevention but hold major concerns when pressure injuries occur.
- Value of the research? Yes, the findings identified the importance of collaboration across different levels of nurses and wound care experts to facilitate quality pressure injury prevention
