Running head: CATHETER-ASSOCIATED URINARY TRACK INFECTION

NURS 6052
Week 6 Assignment: Application: Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods
Studies
Date:
Your Name:
Article reference (in APA style): Tiwari, M., Charlton, M., Anderson, J., Hermsen, E., & Rupp,
M. (2012). Inappropriate use of urinary catheters: A prospective observational
study. American Journal Of Infection Control, 40(1), 51-54.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2011.03.032
URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196655311003257
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE
1. Research Issue and Purpose
The research problem was to determine if improper use of urinary catheters exist hence
contributing to urinary tract infections. The study explored the issue through an observational
study. The research problem was informed by a realization that data on risk factors linked with
improper use of urinary catheter use is scarce despite the clear role of urinary catheters in
nosocomial urinary tract infections.
2. Researcher Pre-understandings
The researcher provides solid background by exploring the salient role urinary catheters play
furthermore, the authors backup their claims with statically inferences of hospitalized patients
with indwelling urinary catheter. The researcher firmly anchor the research topic by detailing

CATHETER-ASSOCIATED URINARY TRACK INFECTION

percentage of patients estimated to suffer catheter-associated urinary tract infections and invokes
previous studies on the same.
3. Literature Review
Unfortunately, the author presents weak literature review. The little literature review provided
in the introduction is inadequate in critiquing. For instance, there is no attempt to mention or link
research designs and outcomes from the subject literature review.
4. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework
The article invokes observational study and lacks a concrete nursing framework in
exploration of the issue.
5. Participants
The participants were patients admitted in an adult general medical-surgical unit. Prior to
commencement of study, the accuracy of digital data was validated by equating paper medical
records and digital records. The process was done severally during the active study period to
ensure accuracy of records.
6. Protection of Human Research Participants
The study was conducted in line with The Institutional Review Board (IRB) . It is thus
appropriate to say that participants rights were protected.
7. Research Design
The research employed observational study in which a prospective review of digital medical
records of 436 patients admitted during the study period was conducted to evaluate the proper
use of urinary catheter.
8. Data Collection/Generation Methods

CATHETER-ASSOCIATED URINARY TRACK INFECTION

An independent observer extracted data on daily basis from patients with or without
catheters. The extracted data included demographic details such as sex and age, duration of
hospital stay, diagnosis and medical history among others. Additionally data on use of urinary
catheter were captured. The ward personnel were kept unaware of details of the study.
9. Credibility
Credibility was enhanced by the fact that there was a routine verification by the researchers.
Additionally, collection of the data by an independent observer and keeping ward personnel
unaware enhanced credibility because data was collected in natural process.
10. Data Analysis
Data analysis was desirably done using statistical analysis software. Modeled functions of
predictors were employed to capture proper usage of urinary catheter. The analysis was accurate
and replicable as it met the 95% confidence index.
11. Findings
A key finding was that infections occurred with improper use of the catheters. Mortality and
ICU admission measures were not associated with the urinary catheter because the research was
conducted in a non ICU setting. Logistic regression designs showed that improper use was likely
in individuals with multiple urinary catheters during hospitalization. Increased duration of
catheterization also increased improper usage of urinary catheter. The study also showed a link
between older patient age and high urinary catheter use even though age was not a predictor.
12. Discussion of Findings
The findings were in harmony with previous studies on the same. The study like others
linked improper usage of urinary catheter with CAUTI-linked morbidity.
13. Limitations

CATHETER-ASSOCIATED URINARY TRACK INFECTION

The research detailed its scope and gave limitations. The study showed that its scope was
confined to a single medical unit at a single institution hence limiting generalizability.
14. Implications
The implications of the study are that bigger rates of improper urinary catheter use were
observed including longer hospital duration of hospitalization with improper use. the study thus
suggest that hospitals create guidelines and workable policies to address use of urinary catheters
for hospitalized patients.
15. Recommendations
The study recommends that medical facilities establish guidelines on proper usage of urinary
catheter for hospitalized patients. Additionally, the article implicitly suggests further research in
the area of usage of urinary catheter.
16. Research Utilization in Your Practice
The study critically points out that nursing personnel inadvertently worsen improper usage of
urinary catheter hence the need for guidelines. There is need to brief, educate and incorporate
nurses on proper usage of urinary catheters.
Article 2
Article reference (in APA style): Kang, S., Hsu, N., Tang, G., & Hwang, S. (2007). Impact of
Urinary Catheterization on Geriatric Inpatients with Community-acquired Urinary Tract
Infections. Journal Of The Chinese Medical Association,70(6), 236-240.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s1726-4901(09)70365-x
URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S172649010970365X

CATHETER-ASSOCIATED URINARY TRACK INFECTION

QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE

1. Research Problem and Purpose
The research problem was Urinary catheterization on geriatric inpatients. It is informed by
the realization that urinary tract infections often cause hospitalizations in community-dwelling
geriatric populations. The purpose of the study was to comprehend the effect of urinary
catheterization on geriatric inpatients coupled with community-acquired urinary tract infections.
2. Hypotheses and Research Questions
The research hypothesis was; Urinary tract infections cause hospitalizations.
3. Literature Review
A wide range of literature was used to give a background what has been done. Scholarly and
peer reviewed resources were used.
4. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework
The study pursued descriptive analyses and collected digital files of discharge briefs over
time in Taiwan. The conceptual framework drew from international classification of diseases,
ICD-9-CM of UTIs and clustered the related Clinical Modification codes into four clusters.
5. Population
A sample of 294 Patients in rural community hospitals older than 65 years formed the study
population.
6. Protection of Human Research Participants
The data was collected under institutional ethics guidelines implying protection of human
research participants.
7. Research Design

CATHETER-ASSOCIATED URINARY TRACK INFECTION

The research deigns employed retrospective analyses and built on previous studies. Data was
screened with ICD-9CM codes and chart reviews on patients aged at least 65 years with CAUTIs
was conducted.
8. Instruments and Strategies for Measurement
ICD-9-CM codes were pivotal in screening data. Additionally, chart reviews were used.
THIMS, a hospital management system was pivotal in helping retrieve quality digital records of
patients.
9. Data Collection
Data gathering involved getting electronic files of discharge summaries in a local community
hospital.
10. Data Analysis
Distribution, regression analysis and tabulation were utilized in meeting the research design
and hypotheses.
11. Interpretation of Results
Urinary catheterization should be assessed cautiously for geriatric patients before being
carried out. The effect of urinary catheterization on the distribution of microorganism in
Community-Acquired UTIs was shown to be inconsequential.
12. Discussion of Findings
The findings were in line with earlier studies as guidelines for urinary catheterization in
healthcare are clearly known.
13. Limitations
The authors acknowledged limitations were linked to the limits of retrospective analyses like
incapability to assess subjects nutritional well-off.

CATHETER-ASSOCIATED URINARY TRACK INFECTION

14. Implications
The implications are in line with study findings. For instance, the study draws on frequent
admissions as being the most significant risk factor for urinary catheterization.
15. Recommendations
The author recommends that urinary catheterization be examined and managed cautiously
prior to performance in aged patients because of catheter-triggered risk factors. The
recommendations are consistent with flow of the research and qualify the article for replication.
16. Research Utilization in Your Practice
The research calls for finding ways to manage urinary catheter prior to performing it
especially on aged patients.
Advantages and Disadvantages of the Two Research Approaches Featured In the Articles
The biggest merit of qualitative study is that it allows in-depth covering of issues and
subject. The data gathered depends on human experience making it more compelling and
powerful than the one gathered via quantitative research. The greatest demerit of qualitative
study is that ir is prone to personal bias and it is difficult to assess rigidity. On the other hand,
quantitative study it is easier to analyze data when it gets collated as it is built on numbers. The
greatest disadvantage is that it requires frequent updating of figures for the study to retain its
relevance.
Qualitative Research is not Real Science
Scientific methods are built on the pillars of falsifiability, parsimony, precision and
replicability. Reliability describes the degree to which a study can be repeated and get the same
results (Bhattacherjee, 2012). In this aspect qualitative research is scientific. Falsifiability is
making sure the data is presented in a way that it can be rejected. In this aspect, qualitative

CATHETER-ASSOCIATED URINARY TRACK INFECTION

research is challenging to falsify. Qualitative studies lack precision making them less scientific
(Burrows, 2004). They however, display parsimony.
Mixed research methods provide in-depth understanding and corroboration while
minimizing weaknesses inherent in each approach (McKim, 2015; Hlebec & Mrzel, 2012).
Additionally, they provide possibility of triangulation which allows approaching a phenomenon
from various vantage points.
References
Bhattacherjee, A. (2012). Social science research: principles, methods, and practices. University
of South Florida Scholar Commons. Retrieved from
http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=oa_textbooks
Burrows, E. A. (2004). Critiquing Nursing Research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 46, 4, 460.
Kang, S., Hsu, N., Tang, G., & Hwang, S. (2007). Impact of Urinary Catheterization on Geriatric
Inpatients with Community-acquired Urinary Tract Infections. Journal Of The Chinese
Medical Association,70(6), 236-240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s1726-4901(09)70365-x
McKim, C. (2015). The Value of Mixed Methods Research: A Mixed Methods Study. Journal Of
Mixed Methods Research. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1558689815607096
Tiwari, M., Charlton, M., Anderson, J., Hermsen, E., & Rupp, M. (2012). Inappropriate use of
urinary catheters: A prospective observational study. American Journal Of Infection
Control, 40(1), 51-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2011.03.032