Qualitative Research

Qualitative Research

Qualitative research is a scientific study method employing observation to gather such non-numerical data as definitions, meanings, symbols, concepts, features, metaphors, and descriptions of variables. Therefore, the characteristics of qualitative study include design flexibility, naturalistic inquiry, and inductive analysis. As Grove, Gray, and Faan (2019) contend, qualitative research is naturalistic because it involves a natural variable study; flexible because it is possible for researchers to emerge topics; and analytically inductive because is enables the researcher to be involved in the group. As such, qualitative research is perfect for studying such nursing issues as patient preferences and their attitude towards nursing care.

Qualitative study designs such as phenomenology, grounded theory and ethnography all share such similarities as responding to research questions and observing informed consent. However, while the goal of phenomenology is to describe experiences as lived by study participants with outcomes involving identification of themes by the researcher, the purpose of grounded theory is theory development with outcomes ensuring that the theory draws support from data example (Grove, Gray, & Faan2019). Conversely, the purpose of ethnography is to describe the characteristics of the cultures of the study participants with outcomes that are descriptive of the culture.

In informing nursing practice, qualitative research evidence captures details concerning local knowledge on a variety of issues such as the impact of cultural diversity on nursing care. Similarly, this design could identify how different individuals conceptualize different situations hence could analyze organizational beliefs to ensure that nurses adapt to change. However, the weakness of this research in informing nursing practice lies not only on the fact that it employs no study hypothesis but also on the fact that it has limited scope for generalization (Haber, 2013). However, it is normally used in research to draw generalizable conclusions.

Critique of Qualitative Research

The purpose of the study by McLaws et al. (2015), is to assess the relationship between personal factors and hand hygiene compliance. This research employed a qualitative structured interview, which is appropriate to meet the purpose since interviews could help determining hand hygiene status in the two health care facilities in Shiraz, Iran: A public teaching hospital and a private health care facility. The ethical issues in this study would relate to informed consent and the study covered this by ensuring that the participants had adequate information concerning the study before consenting to being part of it. The research employed purposive sampling method to recruit staff from such critical point of care as surgery and intensive care unit (ICU) with place of work being of great significance in the inclusion (Mclaws et al., 2015). These sampling and recruitment strategies were appropriate to the aims of the study since they only allowed participants whose hand hygiene behavior has the greatest impact on patient outcomes.

Sampling, data collection, and Analysis

The study also employed interviews in data collection, which was appropriate for the study due to participant privacy in the study. Data analysis ensued in an inductive approach aimed at coding the information together with a deductive framework for indexing data. As such, the study identified the concepts about the behavior of health care workers and compared with systematic review themes as well as the thematic coded in analytic frameworks, which is appropriate for the aims of study. Judging the rigor of a qualitative research could employ such rigor as conformability, credibility, dependability, and transferability. The Mclaws et al. (2015) study measures the intended variables and is a true reflection not only of participants’ social realty but also the compliance to hand hygiene among nurses. As such, it is conformable, credible, dependable, and transferable.

In the outcomes of the study, most of HCWs hands formed a prime factor in the transmission of infective agents within the hospital setting, with all of them stressing on the significance of hand hygiene in the prevention of the transmission of infections. Similarly, cultural factors were significant obstacles to the practice of proper hand hygiene (McLaws et al., 2015). However, there was no clear relationship between knowledge and hand hygiene. Conversely, working environment conditions proved to be important factors that affect compliance to hand hygiene, with unavailability of hand hygiene resources being a significant factor contributing to non-adherence. However, the weakness of this research in informing nursing practice lies not only on the fact that it employs no study hypothesis but also on the fact that it has limited scope for generalization (Mclaws et al., 2015). Conversely, it is trustworthy hence can be applicable in nursing practice to improve hand hygiene during patient care to prevent nosocomial infections.

Quantitative Research

Quantitative research is a systematic phenomenal investigation through gathering of quantifiable data as well as performance of computational, mathematical, or statistical techniques. As such, quantitative research has such characteristics as employing structured study instruments to gather data and forming basis on larger samples that are more representative of the larger population. Therefore, nursing issues such as hospital readmission and nosocomial infections tend to employ quantitative research. According to Grove, Gray, and Faan (2019), while observational studies include cross-sectional, ecological, case-control, and prospective as well as retrospective cohort study designs, interventional studies are normally prospective with specific tailoring to direct impact evaluation of treatment.

Similarly, the researcher selects the assignment criterion in quasi-experiments whereas experimental design involves natural assignment without any intervention by the researcher. Moreover, while descriptive statistics employs data in describing the population, inferential statistics make predictions and inferences from the population on the basis of sample. Because they both relate samples to the population, these statistical approaches both relate to levels of measurement Grove, Gray, and Faan (2019). However, quantitative research is normally used in research to draw generalizable conclusions.

Critique of Quantitative Research

The study purpose, design, ethical consideration

The purpose of the study by Baker, O’Reilly, Levine, Kotloff, Nataro, Ayers, and Alonso (2016) was to identify whether sanitation facility with one or more households has an association with increased risk of moderate to severe diarrhea (MSD) in young children. This research employed quantitative GEMS matched case-control study between December 1, 2007 and March 3, 2011 at seven locations including Basse in Gambia, Nyanza Province in Kenya, Bamako in Mali, Manhica in Mozambique, Mirzapur in Bangladesh, Kolkata in India, and Karachi in Pakistan. With randomization referring to subject allocation to study with equal chance of receiving interventions and blinding being ensuring the subjects and possibly the researchers are unaware of the intervention, the study used the two techniques to deter bias (Baker et al., 2016). The ethical issues in this study related to informed consent and the study covered this by ensuring that the participants had adequate information concerning the study before consenting to being part of it.

Sampling, Data collection, and Data analysis

The study employed random sampling and applied the Cochran formula to calculate sample size as 8592 under five-year olds experiencing MSD as cases and 12390 asymptomatic controls (Baker et al., 2016). The study employed observation, as a data collection method with the aid of such instruments as videos to capture the information in totality. With reliability being about the consistency of a measure and validity about accuracy, the study appropriately applied the two concepts to measure how well the method tested the hypothesis (Baker et al., 2016). Data analysis ensued though fitting of prior statistical distribution to each model of the MSD level parameters in capturing uncertainty of the information employed. Gamma distributions were used in the analysis to ensure positivity of costs. As such, the study employed ordinal level of measurements (Baker et al., 2016).

Findings and limitations

As part of the study outcomes, more than 93% of households in six location had sanitation facilities and practiced hand hygiene with only 70% of the rural households in Kenya having access to the facilities (Baker et al., 2016). In Kenya, Mozambique, and Pakistan, sharing of sanitation facilities had an association with increased risks for MSD in young children. Among individuals who had sanitation facilities designated for hand washing in their homes, the application of either soap or ash was more prevalent, especially in control households. These interventions proved to be of great significance in protecting young children against MSD not only in India but also in Mozambique (Baker et al., 2016). However, the weakness of this research in informing nursing practice lies not only on the fact that it employs no study hypothesis but also on the fact that it has limited scope for generalization. Conversely, it is trustworthy hence can be applicable in community health nursing practice to improve hand hygiene during in homes to MSD in children. The research is also applicable to further research.