Wong and Li’s (2019) cross-sectional survey showed a positive dynamic in adherence to infection control. The study also showed an increase in patient numbers aged 85 and more, which decrease mortality rates – by 10% (Wong & Li, 2019). This research can be considered reliable because all the data collected either on-site or through online surveys or interviews with the staff was “double-entered or double-checked by two separate colleagues” (Wong & Li, 2019, p. 115).
Such procedure ensures the consistency of information collected, as the concept of validity is “the extent to which an instrument measures the attributes of a concept accurately” (Lobiondo-Wood & Haber, 2018, p. 278). The only possible downfall in the rigor of this research is the use of surveys and questionnaires to collect data on patient profiles, as such information is naturally inclined to be subjective. Generally, the relevance of the present study to the issue is high, due to it being longitudinal, with annual surveys – while also showing nurses’ adherence to infection control via observing it on-site.
Another research concerns hospitalized care and nutritional-risk-related nosocomial infections. All subjects were aged 65 or more, with 127 patients showing no nutritional risk at all, compared to severe risk found in 27 participants (Gamaletsou, et al., 2012, p. 170). The quality of the research is attributed to the following facts: during physiological measurements, patients were weighted with a validated scale; the occurrence of hospital-caused infections (HCAIs) was determined by an infectious diseases specialist – and swallowing ability was assessed with a designated tool (Gamaletsou et al., 2012).
A measurement tool of scoring – the ECOG performance status was designed to observe the progression of the disease (Gamaletsou, et al., 2012). Grove and Gray note that rating scales are “the crudest form of measurement”, which can be listed as one of the weakest points in the study. However, given the credibility of the previously mentioned methods, as well as the investigator combining patient medical records with other diagnostic tests, one can say that this is a relevant source.
In conclusion, it is appropriate to say that both studies can be considered credible and valuable, as both were conducted by professional researchers in the field that utilized a wide array of methods: in terms of rigor some methods can be questionable. However, in terms of relevance to the clinical issue, both studies are imperatively valuable, since they deal with the issue directly.
References
Gamaletsou, M. N., Poulia, K.-A., Karageorgou, D., Yannakoulia, M., Ziakas, P. D., Zampelas, A., & Sipsas, N. V. (2012). Nutritional risk as a predictor for healthcare-associated infection among hospitalized elderly patients in the acute care setting. Journal of Hospital Infection, 80(2), 168–172.
Grove, S. K. & Gray, J. K. (2018). Understanding nursing research: Building an evidence-based practice. Saunders.
LoBiondo-Wood, G. & Haber, J. (2018). Nursing Research: Methods and Critical Appraisal for Evidence-based Practice. Elsevier.
Wong, G. C. & Li, T. (2019). Infection control in residential care homes for the elderly in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Medical Journal, 25(1), 113-119.