Patients and health care professionals

Write a critical appraisal that demonstrates comprehension of two qualitative research
studies. Use the “Research Critique Guidelines – Part 1” document to organize your essay.
Successful completion of this assignment requires that you provide rationale, include
examples, and reference content from the studies in your responses.
Use the practice problem and two qualitative, peer-reviewed research article you identified
in the Topic 1 assignment to complete this assignment.
In a 1,000–1,250 word essay, summarize two qualitative studies, explain the ways in which
the findings might be used in nursing practice, and address ethical considerations
associated with the conduct of the study.

Critiquing

Background of Study
In a qualitative study conducted to assess nurses’ experiences and perceptions on
convalescent involvement in convalescent safety, the researchers noted that patients and health
care professionals had a collective and shared responsibility for improved health outcomes.
Patient safety is an important aspect not only to the patient themselves but also to managers,
policymakers, and health care professionals as well. There is a need to increase patient
involvement in safety-related programs grounded on the postulation that their engagement with
health care providers can enhance health care in a myriad of ways. Additionally, the research
question is the nurse’s perceptions and experiences of convalescent involvement on their safety.
The purpose of this research is to scan the health care provider’s views on convalescent
participation in the care process. This study dramatically influences the nursing practice in that
the health care system should accord time and supportive settings to encourage open discussion
between patients and health care professionals (Skagerström et al., 2017).
In a study by Sun et al., (2020), it is clear that COVID 19 is thinning rapidly, resulting in
unprecedented challenges and pressure to the nursing staff. The objective of this study is to
assess the psychology of caregivers caring for COVID-19 convalescents. Medical workers are at
the forefront of the battle against the pandemic. Unfortunately, many frontline workers have

CRITIQUING 2
forfeited their health and are infected, and some are deceased. For this reason, there is an
increasing psychological pressure among medical staff that escalating physical and psychological
stress. This staff feels ex-communicated and helpless due to the high intensity of work emanating
from the aforementioned public health emergency.
For this reason, this study’s main objective is to examine the psychology of nurses taking
care of COVID-19 convalescents. The study provides an in-depth comprehension of the
psychological encounters in the event of an epidemic. As such, both negative and positive
emotions of the frontline nurses interweave and co-exist.
Use of articles in answering PICOT question
The two articles, as mentioned earlier, provide a background to answer the PICOT
question. The articles provide valuable insights in data collection methods and analysis
techniques. The PICOT question focuses on phenomenological study, and the narrative approach
is appropriate for giving respondents more information on the subject matter.
Interventions and comparison groups
In retrospect, the articles collect data from nurses in health care facilities. However, the
PICOT question incorporates both the convalescents and the health care providers. The
interventions in these two articles require collaborative work between nurses and patients to
improve health care outcomes.
Method of Study
The authors of the first article about convalescent engagement for improved patient safety
incorporate explorative study where data is obtained through open-ended interviews. The data
collected is analyzed through content analysis technique. Conversely, in the second article, the

CRITIQUING 3
authors incorporate Colaizzi’s technique to qualitatively assess nurses’ psychological encounters
taking care of COVID-19 convalescents.
Accordingly, content analysis is data-driven, and it is purely grounded on the participant’s
distinct perspective as opposed to the pre-defined hypothesis. On the other hand, Colaizzi’s
phenomenological approach emphasizes the feelings and experiences of respondents and finds
common trends instead of individual attributes in the study subjects.
Benefit and set back of each technique
Alluding to Morrow, Rodriguez, & King (2015), a descriptive phenomenological
approach reveals the essential structure of any phenomenon. Colaizzi’s phenomenological
technique encompasses a seven-phase procedure that provides rigorous scrutiny with every step
solidly grounded on the data. The final result is concise, containing all descriptions of the event
under examination. This method is suitable since the data can be collected through various
methods such as online interviews, written narratives, research diaries, blogs, and one-on-one
meetings. The researcher’s bias significantly impedes the successful application of Colaizzi’s
phenomenological method since the technique is dependent on the researcher’s ability to interpret
data. 
According to Maier (2017), the content investigation technique is a sequential procedure
of examining communication statements by determining the occurrence of message attributes.
The content analysis approach is high reliability since it follows systematic procedures to be
replicated. However, if the coding is done wrongly, the eventual findings are rendered invalid.
Results of Study
The psychological encounters of nurses looking after COVID-19 convalescents are
broken down into four aspects. Firstly, early-stage negative emotions such as discomfort, fatigue,

CRITIQUING 4
and helplessness emanate from fear, anxiety, and high work intensity. Secondly, self coping
techniques such as life modification, team support, and altruistic acts are vital for psychological
well-being. Thirdly, there is thriving under pressure, which includes increased gratefulness and
affection, self-reflection, and professional responsibility enhancement. Finally, the study
highlight that positive emotions co-occur with negative emotions.
In assessing the patient’s involvement in patient safety, the authors note that both the
health care professionals and patients have a shared responsibility towards patient safety.
Additionally, the nurses focus on the essentiality of their initiatives to accomplish patient
engagement for improved convalescent safety by commencing dialogue and creating an enabling
platform for patients to ask questions. There are barriers to achieving patient safety, including
rigidity of the health care system and health care professionals.
The applications of the two research work in nursing practice.
To improve patient safety, the health care system needs to accord time and create a
supportive environment to enhance open communication between patients and healthcare
professionals. Additionally, there is a need for training among health care professionals to
encourage convalescent’s involvement in the care process.
Furthermore, during any pandemic, health care providers experience both positive and
negative emotions. Thus, there is a need to create awareness and sensitize nurse-of-self coping
mechanisms and psychological advancement to uphold mental health. Health facilities should
prepare nurses and physicians to cope with stressing work environments.
Ethical Considerations
Informed consent and respect for intellectual property are some of the ethical
considerations while conducting research. The researchers have to obtain consent from the

CRITIQUING 5
respondents or participants before commencing research work. Similarly, the researcher should
not plagiarize or copy other people’s work without permission.
As noted in both articles, the authors strictly followed various ethical considerations. All
participants in the two studies signed informed consent and academic misconducts, such as
illegal use of other scholars’ work, data forgery, and fabrication. They have been avoided by
conducting one-on-one interviews and citing referenced materials.

CRITIQUING 6

References

Maier, M. (2017). Content analysis: advantages and disadvantages. The SAGE encyclopedia of
communication research methods, 240-242.
Morrow, R., Rodriguez, A., & King, N. (2015). Colaizzi’s descriptive phenomenological
method. The psychologist, 28(8), 643-644.
Skagerström, J., Ericsson, C., Nilsen, P., Ekstedt, M., & Schildmeijer, K. (2017). Patient
involvement for improved patient safety: A qualitative study of nurses’ perceptions and
experiences. Nursing Open, 4(4), 230-239.
Sun, N., Shi, S., Jiao, D., Song, R., Ma, L., Wang, H…, & Wang, H. (2020). A qualitative study
on the psychological experience of caregivers of COVID-19 patients. American Journal
of Infection Control.

Looking for Discount?

You'll get a high-quality service, that's for sure.

To welcome you, we give you a 20% discount on your All orders! use code - NWS20

Discount applies to orders from $30
All Rights Reserved, Nursingwritingservice.com
Disclaimer: You will use the product (paper) for legal purposes only and you are not authorized to plagiarize. In addition, neither our website nor any of its affiliates and/or partners shall be liable for any unethical, inappropriate, illegal, or otherwise wrongful use of the Products and/or other written material received from the Website. This includes plagiarism, lawsuits, poor grading, expulsion, academic probation, loss of scholarships / awards / grants/ prizes / titles / positions, failure, suspension, or any other disciplinary or legal actions. Purchasers of Products from the Website are solely responsible for any and all disciplinary actions arising from the improper, unethical, and/or illegal use of such Products.