Benchmark – Qualitative Research Critique

Problem Statement

The article in question, “Pressure Ulcers in Intensive Care Patients: A Review of Risks and Prevention” by Keller, Willie, Ramshorst and Werken (2002) is significant as it demonstrates in detail how a pressure ulcer affects intensive care patients. The problem statement that has been discussed in the mentioned work is “pressure ulcers in hospitalized patients.” The issue with it is that it has not effectively addressed the aspects particular that would be discussed in particular (Keller et al., 2002). As a result, it can be deemed as an inefficient article with a problem statement that lacks the needed contents. The criticism is based on the fact that issues associated with the types of pressure ulcers and approaches used to treat patients also have not been put into consideration. Furthermore, the content of the problem statement is blunt and, as a result, one might look at it from a different angle. A person who is not associated with the term in question might perceive it as normal ulcers-related diseases (Keller et al., 2002). Thus, the term ‘pressure ulcers’ should have been emphasized and explained in brackets so as to evade confusing the readers. Apparently, the above-mentioned reasons elucidate why I perceive the content of the problem statement as ineffective for the readers to fully follow.

Study Purpose

The article shows that the objective of the study is to review the literature concerning pressure ulcers in the intensive care setting. Fundamentally, the issue with the objective of the work is that it has not fully included the requirements of the research. It is so as when one reads the entire article, he/she can easily notice that different people referred to pressure ulcers with different terms. The authors do not mention anything associated with the importance of having the various terms in the health care sector. Additionally, they also do not describe the outcome of the study based on its objective. It is an inappropriate article in the field of health care as the authors did not mention what would be undertaken after learning about pressure ulcers in the intensive care unit atmosphere. As a result, the reader cannot follow what would happen (Cox, 2011). The implication here is that the study requirement subheading misleads the reader in terms of setting him or her in a state of confusion.

Research Question

The research question on pressure ulcers was addressed but not from a full health care point of view. The rationale for my perspective is that the authors concluded that not much information on the question can be found. Significantly, they must have researched from an ancient perspective. Therefore, the scientists had to include more information in order to help the reader comprehend what is taking place in the ICU when associating with pressure ulcers in hospitalized patients (Keller et al., 2002). The authors of the article have addressed the question from a qualitative approach, but have not used tables that are understandable. Therefore, modernized tables should have been employed so as to effectively show the outcome of the research at hand.

Literature Review

The discussion of the assessment on pressure ulcers in hospitalized patients was not well arranged as well as addressed. The paper was focused on both existing and the newly developed scales for the intensive care unit tools, but concluded that they are not significant. The implication here is that the authors have not fully addressed the tools in detail. As a result, the paper needs more information so as to effectively inform the reader that the problem of pressure ulcer is being studied in intensive care units (Cox, 2011). Furthermore, using more detailed articles would be appropriate as it would cover the aspect of how the modern society is dealing with pressure ulcers in the intensive care units.

The authors of the article have only focused on three types of preventive measures, which is an inappropriate perspective. Significantly, it would be better if they would have opted to add more preventive measures so as to expand their study and show the reader that a convincing research has been put into consideration. Giving examples on how the preventive measures have been utilized was not considered, hence, it indicates that the mentioned preventive measures have not fully been utilized (Keller et al., 2002). The only information that the authors offer concerning the preventive measure is perceptions on how the tools can be used.

Fundamentally, more information on how to use the mentioned tools and what are the outcomes of using them should have been evaluated. The full assessment of the preventive measures would serve as a major support of their importance. The absence of well-developed prospective learning entities calls for a need to develop such institutions (Dunn, Kathuria, & Klotman, 2012). The entity can be utilized to establish detailed risk factors and test the manipulation of preventive measures. Moreover, it would ease the work of nurses and be cost effective for the patients in general.

When it comes to the issues associated with in intensive care unit patients, the authors have not illustrated the risk factors in detail. As a result, they tend to offer the readers the task of reasoning what has been written themselves. Apparently, it is not a good approach as the reader is made think from a critical point of view so as he/she has to know how different factors affect patients. The authors have only demonstrated that patients are likely to pay more and emphasized on the increased amount of pressure ulcers (Cox, 2011). Moreover, the arrangement of the content of the paper is not good, hence, proper reconsideration is necessary, for example, the outline needs to be included so as to assist the reader to follow the evaluation well.

Related Free Healthcare Essays

Your request should consist of 5 char min.