Through a comprehensive analysis of the quantitative article written by Gül, Üstündag, and Zengin, a thorough critique of all elements of the paper will be examined including summaries of the various elements in the research paper, the strengths and limitations of each element, as well as implications for practice.
The purpose of the research paper is to assess the hand hygiene compliance of undergraduate students in the nursing and midwifery program (Gül et al., 2012, p. 275), as healthcare associated infections are affecting millions of patients worldwide, ultimately causing morbidity and mortality (Gül et al., 2012, p. 275). By assessing these students, the authors will look at the students’ “knowledge of and compliance with HH” (Gül et …show more content…
276). Bouma, Ling, and Wilkinson (2012) define conceptualization as the procedure where “major concepts such as the independent and dependent variable are identified and formulated” (p. 281). Gül et al. conceptualized five concepts that were directly listed as keywords in the article. The concepts: hand hygiene, students, midwifery, nursing, and compliance were clearly operationalized, meaning that Gül et al. provided “concrete definitions of [the] concepts in an attempt to make [the] concept[s] measurable” (Bouma, Ling, & Wilkinson, 2012, p. 284). This was done to ensure that the reader had an abstract understanding of all dimensions of the article. In order to effectively carry out the research process, Gül et al. chose students in the nursing and midwifery program that were in their second to fourth year of studies, as work experience in the hospital was a requirement that was needed to be met by the students (Gül et al., 2012, p. 276). The exclusion criteria of the study were first year students and Gül et al. had excluded these …show more content…
662). Gül et al. included in the article that a chi-square and Fisher’s exact test was the statistical tests used. There was no indication as to why these specific tests were chosen; however, the results are clearly presented in a paragraph and summarized table (Gül et al., 2012, pp. 277-278). By examining the results, a threat to reliability is present as six participants indicated, using the Fulkerson’s scale, that feces are considered clean (Gül et al., 2012, p. 278). It is likely that some students did not take the study seriously, due to their fickle results. The findings of the study were explained further in the discussion section of the article. The results are quite extensive, but they did not appear to affect the logical flow or limit the frequency of linking their results back to the literature review (Coughlan et al., 2012, p. 662). As for the recommendations that were discussed in the article, it is clear that further education and pre-registration training should be implemented to ensure proper hand hygiene compliance and to ultimately reduce the risk of health care-associated infections (Gül et al., 2012, pp. 278-279). The researchers effectively accomplished the purpose of the study, as they gained further information into “nursing and midwifery students’
The purpose of the research paper is to assess the hand hygiene compliance of undergraduate students in the nursing and midwifery program (Gül et al., 2012, p. 275), as healthcare associated infections are affecting millions of patients worldwide, ultimately causing morbidity and mortality (Gül et al., 2012, p. 275). By assessing these students, the authors will look at the students’ “knowledge of and compliance with HH” (Gül et …show more content…
276). Bouma, Ling, and Wilkinson (2012) define conceptualization as the procedure where “major concepts such as the independent and dependent variable are identified and formulated” (p. 281). Gül et al. conceptualized five concepts that were directly listed as keywords in the article. The concepts: hand hygiene, students, midwifery, nursing, and compliance were clearly operationalized, meaning that Gül et al. provided “concrete definitions of [the] concepts in an attempt to make [the] concept[s] measurable” (Bouma, Ling, & Wilkinson, 2012, p. 284). This was done to ensure that the reader had an abstract understanding of all dimensions of the article. In order to effectively carry out the research process, Gül et al. chose students in the nursing and midwifery program that were in their second to fourth year of studies, as work experience in the hospital was a requirement that was needed to be met by the students (Gül et al., 2012, p. 276). The exclusion criteria of the study were first year students and Gül et al. had excluded these …show more content…
662). Gül et al. included in the article that a chi-square and Fisher’s exact test was the statistical tests used. There was no indication as to why these specific tests were chosen; however, the results are clearly presented in a paragraph and summarized table (Gül et al., 2012, pp. 277-278). By examining the results, a threat to reliability is present as six participants indicated, using the Fulkerson’s scale, that feces are considered clean (Gül et al., 2012, p. 278). It is likely that some students did not take the study seriously, due to their fickle results. The findings of the study were explained further in the discussion section of the article. The results are quite extensive, but they did not appear to affect the logical flow or limit the frequency of linking their results back to the literature review (Coughlan et al., 2012, p. 662). As for the recommendations that were discussed in the article, it is clear that further education and pre-registration training should be implemented to ensure proper hand hygiene compliance and to ultimately reduce the risk of health care-associated infections (Gül et al., 2012, pp. 278-279). The researchers effectively accomplished the purpose of the study, as they gained further information into “nursing and midwifery students’