Research Critique Guidelines – Part II

Research Critique Guidelines – Part II

Quantitative Studies

Background

Hospitalization of young children for an extended period results in a gradual loss of the ability to cope with the external challenges that may lead to depression conditions called hospitalization syndrome. Institutionalization of young persons may have a dramatic effect on an individual’s welfare because of the stress and loneliness caused by isolation from the home environment, and a decrease in physical and emotional health may happen consequently. Anxiety and apathy are common symptoms exhibited by patients suffering from hospitalization syndrome. Thus a significant challenge is to design a cheaper and effective intervention, which may lower depression among hospitalized children by stimulating social response and physical body activity.

The identification of the human-animal connection has led to the initiation of animal therapy to improve the lives of hospitalized patients. Dog therapy has acted as an innovative intervention that may reduce physiological conditions of hospitalized patients, because of its ability to enhance communication, thus its significance in nursing practice.  The research purposely tested the value of a dog assisted therapy as an invention to improve psychological conditions of hospitalized patients—also, the study aimed at introducing animal therapy as an alternative to music therapy in healthcare facilities. However, how effective is pet therapy in comparison to art therapy in minimizing hospitalization syndrome among young persons aged ten to fifteen years?

How do these two articles support the nurse practice issue chosen?

In the study, animal therapy for individuals with aphasia, the purpose of the research was to analyze the effectiveness of pet therapy among hospitalized adult patients and investigate if animal therapy was equally effective in speech-language treatment. The results of the study had a positive effect on patients with stress, thus acting as a reference to the results of the picot question (Macauley, 2006). Whereas, in the article, developing an effective pet therapy program using a visiting dog aimed at testing the value of dog therapy intervention to improve the quality of life for the aging population hospitalized over some time (Berry et al., 2012). The results obtained acted as a reference to the outcome of the picot question.

Interventions

The research, developing effective pet therapy using visiting dogs, two dog therapy sessions were carried out twice a week over five months. The dog sessions took place in the morning hours when participants were active and willing to take part in the activity. Two trained dogs and two trained therapists led the therapy sessions. Each participant was allowed to interact with the dog by either walking, feeding, or scraping the dog (Berry et al., 2012). Whereas in the study animal therapy for individuals with aphasia, an eight-year-old trained dog was used, the rehabilitation sessions were carried out once per week over three months period. Also, the therapy sessions lasted half an hour per individual (Macauley, 2006).

a dog therapy rehabilitation program to bring comparison to the picot. The dog received training before the research began to enable it to cope with the stressful circumstances, be friendly with patients, and improve the dog’s obedience during the therapy sessions. Thus the dog completed pet therapy certification. After each rehabilitation session, experimental participants graded their mood status using a scale of the range one to ten, based on the Likert scale.

Comparison

In the article, developing an effective pet therapy, incorporated human being visitations as an alternative intervention. However, control patients did not interact with the dog during the entire period (Berry et al., 2012). Whereas, in the study, animal therapy for individuals with aphasia, a traditional treatment applied as an alternative which lasted for three months (Macauley, 2006). However, picot initiated art therapy as a comparison intervention, and patients ranked their mood status using the Likert scale.

Method of Study

In the article, developing effective pet therapy using visiting dogs utilized a mixed-method technique, a technique that uses integration to analyze both qualitative and quantitative data in one single research (Berry et al., 2012). Whereas, the article, animal therapy for individuals with aphasia, incorporated a meta-analysis technique, a particular type of systematic review technique that analyses various studies to find the final response or conclusion (Macauley, 2006).

Mixed technique

In the article, developing effective pet therapy using visiting dogs, comprehensive data obtained through statistical integration of both frequency and duration of behavioral data, for every participant to determine the possible life term effect of the animal therapy session (Berry et al., 2012). However, the study needs cautious planning to include various aspects of research, such as the plan for data integration and timing the pattern for qualitative and quantitative data.

Meta-analysis

In the article, animal therapy for individuals with aphasia, is full of productive tangible evidence, because of the many analyses done on the study, for instance, investigating if speech-language is more effective than animal therapy and if patients were willing to take part in the animal therapy sessions (Macauley, 2006). Thus the conclusion aids the medical practitioners to have a universal agreement on the best method of treatment. However, it is not very easy to merge the results of different investigations because of the different approaches used by the researcher while doing the research.

Results of Study

The article, developing an effective animal therapy using visiting dogs, obtained results such as increased voluntary interactions with the dog; this was recorded and observed as patients smiled during the therapy session as behavioral effects. Also, physiologically, the control group indicated a decrease in cortisol levels, whereas no changes detected in the cortisol levels for the experimental group. Lastly, the group under study recorded lower stress levels, unlike the control group (Berry et al., 2012). However, the research article pet therapy for individuals with aphasia, recorded that all patients had achieved their goals and objectives over the rehabilitation period, questionnaires indicated that patients under research improved in both physical activity and speech-language (Macauley, 2006).

Implications

The study, developing effective animal therapy using visiting dogs, found out that dog therapy improves the physiological activity of hospitalized elderly by lowering stress levels; hence dog therapy is of benefit in nursing (Berry et al., 2012). Whereas, the article, animal-assisted treatment for individuals with aphasia, revealed that the presence of a dog motivated patients, thus making them achieve their goals. Also, the study indicates the dog sessions improved speech-language (Macauley, 2006).

Outcomes Comparison

Picot outcomes

Dog therapy will be more effective than music therapy by increasing the patients’ willingness to communicate, lower depression levels among hospitalized children, decrease loneliness, and boosts happiness among hospitalized patients.

Outcome comparison

The article, developing effective animal therapy, indicates that the experimental group experienced a decrease in depression level, unlike the control group (Berry et al., 2012), an outcome similar to the PICOT’s anticipated outcome. Whereas, the article, animal-assisted therapy for individuals with aphasia, revealed that the experimental group improved in speech-language after dog therapy sessions (Macauley, 2006), thus similar to the PICOT’s anticipated outcome that the dog will enhance communication among patients.

Ethical consideration

Do not harm

This ethic demands a researcher to avoid intentional harm and reduce potential adverse effects into the constituents; thus a researcher must gauge the damages with equivalent profit to before starting a study (Fouka & Mantzorou, 2011)

Informed consent

This ethic proposes that medical practitioners should help patients to understand the proposed research, including the adverse effects. Also, it recommends the patient should freely participate in the study (Fouka & Mantzorou, 2011)

Informed consent

The study, developing an effective animal therapy by using visiting dogs, fully respected this ethic. The researcher received permission from the respective participants, such as from the guardians or parents of children (Berry et al., 2012). Whereas, the study, animal-assisted therapy for an individual with aphasia, indicates that participants signed the consent form, thus permitting participants to participate in the (Macauley, 2006).

Do not harm

The study, developing effective animal therapy by using visiting dogs, ensured the dogs went through the recommended training, and they undertook all standard health measures before the research began (Berry et al., 2012). However, in the study, animal therapy for individuals with aphasia, the researcher used a qualified pet partner who had met the behavioral evaluations and health standard so as not to harm the participants (Macauley, 2006).

References

Macauley, B. L. (2006). Animal-Assisted Therapy for Persons with Aphasia: A pilot study. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 43(3), 357.

Berry, A., Borgi, M., Terranova, L., Chiarotti, F., Alleva, E., & Cirulli, F. (2012). Developing Effective Animal‐Assisted Intervention Programs Involving visiting dogs for Institutionalized Geriatric Patients: a pilot study. Psychogeriatrics, 12(3), 143-150.

Fouka, G., & Mantzorou, M. (2011). What are the Major Ethical Issues in Conducting Research? Is there a conflict between the Research Ethics and the nature of Nursing?. Health science journal, 5(1),