Critical Appraisal of a Qualitative Research; The Study Pneumonia Care & The Nursing Home

The problem of the effective treatment of patients in nursing homes, who suffer from pneumonia, is extremely important because of numerous risks associated with the transfer of patients from nursing homes to hospitals. In such a situation, the study of the treatment of patients in nursing homes or in site is particularly important because it helps to determine the most efficient and safe treatment strategy of patients. At this point, it is possible to refer to the study Pneumonia care and the nursing home: a qualitative descriptive study of resident and family member perspectives conducted by Carusone, Loeb and Lohfeld, which reveals concerns of patients about their treatment in site and their preferences in the decision making process. This study is important in terms of the development of the effective policy concerning the treatment of patients with pneumonia in nursing homes.

The researchers (Carusone, Loeb, & Lohfeld, 2006) focus on the study of patients in nursing homes, who have suffered from pneumonia to find out which treatment in hospital or in site treatment is more preferable for patients. However, before they conduct their research, they have conducted the extensive analysis of previous studies dedicated to the issue. In this regard, the important task of the researchers was to identify risks associated with pneumonia and transfer as well as risks associated with the treatment of patients in site. The researchers have revealed numerous risks associated with transfer of elderly patients with pneumonia in previous studies. However, they have failed to reveal substantial challenges and risks associated with the treatment of such patients in site. Such lack of evidence justifies, to a certain extent, their study since their study was supposed to reveal the attitude of patients to their treatment in site and their preferences. Nevertheless, the researchers have not conducted the detailed study of risks of the treatment in site in the course of their study and, what is more, they did not conduct the detailed analysis and literature review of previous studies concerning the treatment of elderly patients with pneumonia in site. At this point, it is possible to presuppose that such treatment may also raise some substantial risks, for example, the risk of complications because nursing homes are still not as well equipped and staffed as hospitals, where the treatment of pneumonia is normally conducted. Such risks are likely to increase in elderly patients.

Furthermore, the methodology section of their research provides the detailed information on the methods used by the researchers, which are interviews, and the sample population randomly selected by the researchers among patients with pneumonia in nursing homes. In this regard, the qualitative research involved patients only that is important in terms of obtaining information on the attitude of patients to the treatment of pneumonia in nursing homes. However, such approach to the selection of the sample population is quite controversial. On the one hand, this approach allows reaching the major goal of the research conducted by Carusone, Loeb and Lohfeld (2006), but, on the other hand, the researchers fail to involve experts into the study to obtain more objective and qualified opinion about the possibility of treatment of elderly patients in site. In other words, patients do not have expertise to take adequate decisions concerning their treatment in site (Kane, 1986). For example, they cannot always foresee complications, which they may have, while conducting the treatment of pneumonia in site and they may underestimate other risks. In such a situation, the involvement of health care professionals or, at least, obtaining the general attitude of health care professionals to the treatment of patients in site would help to find out actual risks to their health in both cases, in case of the treatment in site and in hospital.

The findings section provides the key findings of the study conducted by Carusone, Loeb and Lohfeld (2006). The researchers describe their findings and conclude that the reduction of hospitalization of patients with pneumonia is consistent with patients and family member preferences. In such a way, their conclusion is grounded on the subjective attitude of patients to their hospitalization. In fact, the researchers do not provide any alternative opinion of health care professionals in the course of their study. This is why their conclusions are questionable in terms of reliability and adequacy because patients’ expectations and aspirations do not always coincide with the urgent necessity to treat their health problem, such as pneumonia, not in site but in the hospital environment (Secker, et al., 2003). At this point, it is quite noteworthy that many participants of the study viewed the position of health care professionals concerning their hospitalization or treatment in site as determinant and more important than the position of their family members, but many patients still prefer to take decisions on their own.

Thus, the study conducted by Carusone, Loeb and Lohfeld (2006) has revealed that patients and their family members tend to prefer the treatment of pneumonia in nursing homes rather than in hospitals. However, findings made by the researchers do not take into consideration the position of health care professionals and their attitude to the in site treatment of elderly patients. Moreover, the study fails to conduct the extensive analysis of risks associated with the in site treatment of patients. This is why further studies in this field are necessary to obtain reliable findings concerning in site treatment.

 

References:

Carusone, S.C., Loeb, M. and Lohfeld, L. (2006). Pneumonia care and the nursing home: a qualitative descriptive study of resident and family member perspectives. BMC Geriatr., 6(2). Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1379645/

Kane, R. L. (1986). “Medical Care for the Elderly in Other Western Countries”. Home Health Care Services Quarterly 7 (3–4), 307.

Secker, J., et al. (2003). “Promoting independence: But promoting what and how?”. Ageing and Society 23 (3), 375–391.

The terms offer and acceptance. (2016, May 17). Retrieved from

[Accessed: January 20, 2022]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016.

[Accessed: January 20, 2022]

freeessays.club (2016) The terms offer and acceptance [Online].
Available at:

[Accessed: January 20, 2022]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: January 20, 2022]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: January 20, 2022]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: January 20, 2022]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: January 20, 2022]
close
Haven't found the right essay?
Get an expert to write you the one you need!
print

Professional writers and researchers

quotes

Sources and citation are provided

clock

3 hour delivery

person