Discuss about the Introduction to Research in Health Care for Hyperglycaemia.
– 1a: Title of the article is “Implementation of evidence-based treatment protocols to manage fever, hyperglycaemia, and swallowing dysfunction in acute stroke (QASC): a cluster randomised controlled trial”
– 1b: The research conducted to study the treatment protocols for QASC, swallowing dysfunction, hyperglycaemia, and fever
– Background and Objectives
– 2a: QASC, swallowing dysfunction, hyperglycaemia, and fever have been causing a lot of problems to the people. Their management have to be improved to ensure that they are addressed. The study was therefore to provide further information to bridge the missing gap in knowledge regarding the management of these conditions (Middleton et al., 2011).
– 2b: The objective of the research was to study the treatment protocols for QASC, swallowing dysfunction, hyperglycaemia, and fever
– Trial design
– 3a: Multidisciplinary intervention applied to assess the participants used in the study.
– 3b: Random Controlled Trial used in the study to collect data from the participants. Single-blind cluster randomised controlled trial used
– Participants
– 4a: A sample size of patients used to participate in the study to represent the entire target population
– 4b: Participants had to meet the criteria for the inclusion that had been set to ensure that they are suitable for the study
– Interventions
– 5: Intervention for swallowing, sugar and fever done to the ASU clinicians whose selection was based on the Australia’s National Clinical Guidelines that helped in the development of the treatment protocol.
– Outcomes
– 6a: The intervention group had less chances of being dependent or dead as compared to the control group that had higher chances of dying or becoming dependent (Middleton et al., 2011).
– 6b: There were improvements in the morality of the control group, but none at all in the intervention group
Sample Size
– 7a: The sample size was drawn from the ASUs. It was determined after considering the criteria that had been set for them to qualify for the study (Middleton et al., 2011)
– 7b: The selection of the sample was determined by the factors like on-site high dependency and access to CT.
Randomization Sequence
– 8a: The sequence was stratified into categories A and B. At the same time, absolute numbers were used in sequencing
– 8b: The research assistants and trial statisticians were masked
Allocation Concealment
– 9: The research assistants who were used to collect the data by reviewing the medical records and conducting telephone interviews were concealed from knowing the group allocation used (Middleton et al., 2011)
Implementation
– 10: Clinical Research Assistants
Blinding
– 11a: The participants were blinded
– 11b: Blinding done because there was a need not to interfere with the intervention process
Statistical Methods
– 12 a: Sas 9.2 software and intention-to-treat analysis done
– 12b: Descriptive statistics used to categorize the data
Results
– 13a: All the participants in the intervention group were subjected to equal treatment. The same applies to those in the control group (Middleton et al., 2011).
– 13b: 87% of the participants agreed to participate in the intervention while 13% refused to so.
Recruitment
– 14a: 90 days were given for the follow-up of the participants
– 14b: Trial stoped at the end upon completion as planned
Baseline Data
– 15: Intervention versus Control Group had different characteristics
– -16:
Numbers analysed
– 17a: Results for the primary and secondary outcome properly analysed and illustrated in the trial
– 17b: The binary outcome for the study outlined as recommended
Ancillary Analyses
– 18: Adjusted and sub-group analyses done as required
Harms
– 19: The trial was harm-free because it had to comply with the ethical principle of safety
Discussion
Limitations
– 20: No limitations or biases identified because the trial was up to the expected standard
Generalisability
– 21: The research was reliable and valid. Its findings can be generalized into different clinical contexts.
Interpretation
– 22: The interpretation is accurate, correct, consistent, objective, and presents a clear reflection of the trial.
Other Information
Registration:
– 23: DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61485-2
Protocol
– 24: The protocol can be accessed from Lancet
25: The project was done courtesy of the support of National Health & Medical Research Council ID 353803, St Vincent’s Clinic Foundation, the Curran, Australian Catholic University, Australian Diabetes Society-Servier, and the College of Nursing (Middleton et al., 2011).
Yes. The trial succeeded in addressing the issue that was under study. The trial succeeded in finding out the implementation of the EBP treatment strategies for the QASC, hyperglycaemia, and fever. Everything in the trial was done as per the expected standards (Mackey & Gass, 2005),
The researchers were keen on conducting a randomized trial that would be relied upon to adequately respond to the research question and accomplish the research objectives. At the same time, deliberate measures were put to ensure that the findings generated were valid and reliable enough to be generalized to different contexts (Lewis, 2015). That is why the identification and selection of the sample size as well as the collection and analysis of the data was done as per the expected standards.
Yes. The assignment of the patients was randomized because participants in the study were included after going through a well-defined randomization procedure. The study involved the use of different categories of participants: the intervention and control groups (Ledford & Gast, 2018). For one to be included in the study, one had to meet certain conditions that had been set by the researchers. The trial had to be done in compliance to a criterion that would make it possible to collect reliable data that could not be compromised in any way (Creswell & Clark, 2017). That is why it was necessary to randomize the participants because if it were not done this way, the entire trial would not be a success.
Yes. They were accounted for right from the beginning up to the very end of the trial. Throughout the trial period, the researchers kept on accounting for the changes in the participants. Although the beginning of recruitment, there were many participants, the number declined towards the end because there are some participants who, despite their eligibility, never took part in the trial as anticipated (Christmals & Gross, 2017). Hence, by noticing and reporting such changes, it is crystal clear that the researchers were aware of the participants and could account for them at all times.
Yes. The health workers and the study personnel were blinded to the treatment because the researchers made them blind throughout the trial period.
Yes. There was similarity in the group at the beginning of the trial.
A thorough analysis of the trial reveals that all the groups were equally traded because it was necessary for ensuring that the trial was a success.
The treatment effect was fairly large and appropriate for the trial because it would help in achieving the set objectives.
The estimate was fairly large enough to allow for the generalisation of the findings.
Yes. The results of the trial can be applied to other contexts other than the one that was under study. It can help in addressing the health needs of other populations within my locality or any other place because the trial was effectively done by adhering to all the applicable standards.
Yes. All the clinically important outcomes were considered in the trial. That is why the trial produced reliable and valid findings.
The benefits of the trial are better than the costs incurred or the harms experienced. That is why the implications of the trial can be applied in different contexts.
The rigor was properly reported because, in the report, there was a comprehensive coverage of all the activities that were conducted during the trial. One of the most important aspects of the trial that were captured in the rigor is the introduction and background information. Here, a comprehensive analysis of the research question and objectives are provided (Agarwal et al., 2016). At the same time, it captured information on the background knowledge that the readers should know about the research and the research topic. The inclusion of such information was a good idea because it availed all that everyone needed to know about the essence of the trial.
The rigor was also properly done because it contains information on the research methodology. Apart from telling the readers about the reasons for the study, it went ahead and provided objective, accurate, and crucial information on the sample size, its selection, the inclusion criteria, the randomization process, intervention, data collection, and analysis. These are essential information that should be availed to the readers since they need to know how exactly the study was conducted. Lastly, the other aspect of the rigor that makes it appropriate for the trial is that it discusses the findings of the study. Its analysis of the findings, discussion and interpretation is worthy because explains all that should be known about the trial.
References
Agarwal, A., Raad, D., Kairouz, V., Fudyma, J., Curtis, A. B., Schünemann, H. J., & Akl, E.
(2016). The effect of a monetary incentive for administrative assistants on the survey response rate: a randomized controlled trial. BMC medical research methodology, 16(1), 94.
Christmals, C. D., & Gross, J. J. (2017). An integrative literature review framework for postgraduate nursing research reviews. European Journal of Research in Medical Sciences Vol, 5(1).
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. New York: Sage publications.
Ledford, J. R., & Gast, D. L. (2018). Single case research methodology: Applications in special education and behavioral sciences. New York: Routledge.
Lewis, S. (2015). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches.
Health promotion practice, 16(4), 473-475.
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2015). Second language research: Methodology and design.
New York: Routledge.
Middleton, S., McElduff, P., Ward, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Dale, S., D’Este, C., … & Evans, M.
(2011). Implementation of evidence-based treatment protocols to manage fever, hyperglycaemia, and swallowing dysfunction in acute stroke (QASC): a cluster randomised controlled trial. The Lancet, 378(9804), 1699-1706.
Nieswiadomy, R. M., & Bailey, C. (2017). Foundations of nursing research. New York:Pearson.
We provide professional writing services to help you score straight A’s by submitting custom written assignments that mirror your guidelines.
Get result-oriented writing and never worry about grades anymore. We follow the highest quality standards to make sure that you get perfect assignments.
Our writers have experience in dealing with papers of every educational level. You can surely rely on the expertise of our qualified professionals.
Your deadline is our threshold for success and we take it very seriously. We make sure you receive your papers before your predefined time.
Someone from our customer support team is always here to respond to your questions. So, hit us up if you have got any ambiguity or concern.
Sit back and relax while we help you out with writing your papers. We have an ultimate policy for keeping your personal and order-related details a secret.
We assure you that your document will be thoroughly checked for plagiarism and grammatical errors as we use highly authentic and licit sources.
Still reluctant about placing an order? Our 100% Moneyback Guarantee backs you up on rare occasions where you aren’t satisfied with the writing.
You don’t have to wait for an update for hours; you can track the progress of your order any time you want. We share the status after each step.
Although you can leverage our expertise for any writing task, we have a knack for creating flawless papers for the following document types.
Although you can leverage our expertise for any writing task, we have a knack for creating flawless papers for the following document types.
From brainstorming your paper's outline to perfecting its grammar, we perform every step carefully to make your paper worthy of A grade.
Hire your preferred writer anytime. Simply specify if you want your preferred expert to write your paper and we’ll make that happen.
Get an elaborate and authentic grammar check report with your work to have the grammar goodness sealed in your document.
You can purchase this feature if you want our writers to sum up your paper in the form of a concise and well-articulated summary.
You don’t have to worry about plagiarism anymore. Get a plagiarism report to certify the uniqueness of your work.
Join us for the best experience while seeking writing assistance in your college life. A good grade is all you need to boost up your academic excellence and we are all about it.
We create perfect papers according to the guidelines.
We seamlessly edit out errors from your papers.
We thoroughly read your final draft to identify errors.
Work with ultimate peace of mind because we ensure that your academic work is our responsibility and your grades are a top concern for us!
Dedication. Quality. Commitment. Punctuality
Here is what we have achieved so far. These numbers are evidence that we go the extra mile to make your college journey successful.
We have the most intuitive and minimalistic process so that you can easily place an order. Just follow a few steps to unlock success.
We understand your guidelines first before delivering any writing service. You can discuss your writing needs and we will have them evaluated by our dedicated team.
We write your papers in a standardized way. We complete your work in such a way that it turns out to be a perfect description of your guidelines.
We promise you excellent grades and academic excellence that you always longed for. Our writers stay in touch with you via email.