NURS 350_Findings of a Quantitative Study
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
West Coast University, Orange County *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
350
Subject
Medicine
Date
Apr 3, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by sheilahredor
APPENDIX F
Appraisal Guide
Findings of a Quantitative Study
Citation:
Meda, V. S., Babu, K. L. P., Reddy, V. P., Mounika, M., Reddy, S. S., & Reddy, Y. M. (2021). Significance of medication reconciliation in intercepting admission medication errors in the general medicine department. Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 83(5). https://doi.org/10.36468/pharmaceutical-sciences.844
Synopsis
What was the purpose of the study (research questions, purposes, and hypotheses)?
The study aimed to assess medication discrepancies during admission and treatment in South Indian Tertiary Care Hospital. It focused on the importance of medication reconciliation in reducing errors and improving patient safety (Meda et.al, 2021). Data from 106 prescriptions highlighted intentional and unintentional discrepancies, emphasizing the need for accurate medication information. The findings underscored the role of medication reconciliation in minimizing errors and enhancing patient well-being. How was the sample obtained?
The sample of 106 patients was obtained through a prospective observational study conducted over six months at a South Indian Tertiary Care Hospital. Patients admitted to the general medicine department with a past medical history were included in the study. The selection process involved interviewing subjects and collecting data after obtaining informed consent. What inclusion or exclusion criteria were used? The article doesn’t explicitly mention the inclusion or exclusion criteria used in the study. However, it does mention that the study was conducted on 106 patients of both genders, aged over 18, who were admitted to the general medicine department in Government General Hospital-Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Kadapa, with past medical history. What methods were used to collect data (e.g., sequence, timing, types of data, and measures)?
The research adopted a prospective observational approach over 6 months. The primary focus was collecting the best possible medication history through interactions with patients, caregivers,
and medical records. A retrospective model of medication reconciliation was employed, comparing the gathered information with physician prescriptions at the time of admission. Data classification included intentional and unintentional discrepancies, and errors were rectified before reaching the patient. Statistical analysis involved the use of Microsoft Excel and descriptive statistics.
Brown
APP F-1
Was an intervention tested?
Yes
✖
No
1.
How was the sample size determined?
Regarding the sample size determination, the article doesn’t provide specific details on how the sample size was determined. 2.
Were patients randomly assigned to treatment groups?
The article doesn’t mention the random assignment of patients to treatment groups, so it’s unclear whether randomization was employed in this study. What are the main findings?
As for the main findings, the study identified 44 intentional and 8 unintentional discrepancies out
of 106 prescriptions, with 60% of the errors being incomplete prescriptions. Drug-drug interactions were also noted, with 203 possible interactions identified the study concluded that lack of medication reconciliation contributed to medication errors, emphasizing the potential for increased patient safety through successful implementation of medication reconciliation. Credibility
Is the study published in a source that required peer review?
Yes No Not clear
*Did the data obtained and the analysis conducted answer the research question?
Yes No Not clear
Were the measuring instruments reliable and valid?
Yes No Not clear
*Were important extraneous variables and bias controlled?
Yes No Not clear
*If an intervention was tested, answer the following five questions:
Yes No
Not clear
1. Were participants randomly assigned to groups and were the two groups similar at the start (before the intervention)?
Yes No
Not clear
2. Were the interventions well defined and consistently delivered?
Yes No Not clear
3. Were the groups treated equally other than the APP F-2
Brown
difference in interventions?
Yes No Not clear
4. If no difference was found, was the sample size large enough to detect a difference if one existed?
Yes No Not clear
5. If a difference was found, are you confident it was due to the intervention?
Yes No Not clear
Are the findings consistent with findings from other studies?
Yes Some No Not clear
ARE THE FINDINGS CREDIBLE?
Yes All Yes Some No
Clinical Significance
Note any difference in means, r
2
s, or measures of clinical effects (ABI, NNT, RR, OR)
*Is the target population clearly described?
Yes No Not clear
*Is the frequency, association, or treatment effect impressive enough for you to be confident that the finding would make a clinical difference if used as the basis for care?
Yes No Not clear
ARE THE FINDINGS CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT?
Yes All Yes Some No
* = Important criteria
Comments
The term “not clear” was frequently used in the responses because the specific details needed to comprehensively assess credibility, such as instrument reliability and validity, control of vari-
ables, and consistency with other studies, were not explicitly provided in the article. Given the positive outcome of error rectification mentioned in the article, it would be reasonable to acknowledge the study’s credibility in that aspect. However, a comprehensive evaluation would still require additional details on the study’s methodology, potential biases, and its align-
ment with established research practice. Reference
Meda, V. S., Babu, K. L. P., Reddy, V. P., Mounika, M., Reddy, S. S., & Reddy, Y. M. Brown
APP F-3
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
(2021). Significance of medication reconciliation in intercepting admission medication errors in the general medicine department. Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 83(5). https://doi.org/10.36468/pharmaceutical-sciences.844
APP F-4
Brown