Evaluate the discussion section
of the article attached and identify if the following was addressed.
(Note, you need to show evidence, do not just say yes or no. Post what
the researcher indicated that supports that these elements were
addressed in the discussion section. Add the page number where you found
a) limitations and strengths of the study variable(s)
c) theoretical framework
g) data analysis
j)recommendations for future research
2. After reviewing and evaluating the “Discussion” section of the article, discuss the strength of the evidence supports a change in current practice
(If you think it does, support your answer with evidence based
literature. You describe what the article indicated and find another
source to support why the strength of evidence support a change in
3. What is your cosmic question?
(This should be based on chapter of the week. Pose a research question
on discussion section of a research)
Initial Post Due: Thursday 11-25-21 by 2359. Respond by: Saturday 11-27-21 by 2359to 2 people
a) Limitations and strengths of the study variables
In the study carried out by Alderden et al., (2020)., the limitations and strengths were all addressed in the study. For instance, the study was limited to the retrospective design as the data accessed was only available in the EHR. Also, the other factors that can result in PI amongst the patients are not covered by the selected populations (Alderden et al., 2020).
b) Hypothesis/research question
The hypothesis is that reduced mobility and surgery duration, amongst other factors, result in pressure injuries amongst hospitalized patients (Alderden et al., 2020).
c) Theoretical framework
The framework for the study that prompts the research is that decreased mobility and altered perfusion are likely to result in pressure injuries (Alderden et al., 2020).
The designs and methods of the study were addressed in the discussion of the article (Alderden et al.2020). The design used in the study is the retrospective cohort study (Alderden et al., 2020).
The sample was covered in the discussion. A sample of patients in the surgical ICU and a total of 5102 were studied (Alderden et al., 2020).
f)Data collection procedures
The data collection procedure used in the study includes retrieving information from the institution’s enterprise data warehouse for critical care data (Alderden et al., 2020).
g) Data analysis
Data analysis was carried out in the study using the R foundation for statistical sampling. The HAPI potential distribution factors were analyzed to identify variables that are more prone in resulting to HAPI (Alderden et al., 2020).
In the article, some generalizations were made. One was to consider changes in the epidermal layer to reduce skin irritation. Also further studies need to be conducted to find out the relationship between perfusion, intraoperative events, and HAPI risk (Alderden et al., 2020).
The study has a conclusion. The conclusion from the study is that skin irritation is the risk factor of patients in the hospital developing HAPI, and therefore the caregivers should treat any factor that results in skin irritation amongst the patients.
j)Recommendations for future research
There is no recommendation for future research in the study.
2. From the study discussion, the early identification and understanding of the risk factors that present hospitalized patients to develop pressure injuries are significant amongst the healthcare workers in the hospital when managing patients. Some of the factors identified in the article include prolonged hospital stay and skin irritation (Alderden et al.2020). The study is relevant because longer stay on the bed is associated with decreased mobility, which means constant pressure on the skin results in bedsores.
3. my comic question is, “What is the significance of using a retrospective study approach in research?”
Alderden, J., Cowan, L. J., Dimas, J. B., Chen, D., Zhang, Y., Cummins, M., & Yap, T. L. (2020). Risk factors for hospital-acquiredpressure injury in surgicalcritical care patients. American Journal of Critical Care, 29(6), e128-e134.
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.Read more
Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.Read more
Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.Read more
Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.Read more
By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.Read more