NR 439 Week 4 Discussion: Designs

Student Name

Chamberlain University

NR-439: RN Evidence-Based Practice

Prof. Name

Date

Week 4: Designs – A Plan to Study for the Truth

This week’s graded topics are aligned with the following Course Outcomes (COs):

• CO 2: Apply research principles to the interpretation of the content of published research studies (POs 4 & 8).

• CO 4: Evaluate published nursing research for credibility and significance related to evidence-based practice (POs 4 & 8).

Understanding Quantitative and Qualitative Research

During Week 4, the focus was placed on distinguishing between quantitative and qualitative research approaches. Both play a critical role in advancing nursing practice by providing evidence that informs clinical decision-making. Selecting the correct research type and design ensures that findings are meaningful, credible, and applicable to practice.

After reviewing the readings and lessons for this week, it is essential to reflect on how these two methodologies differ and how they contribute to evidence-based nursing.

Key Differences Between Quantitative and Qualitative Research

Quantitative research is particularly valuable when outcomes must be measured and compared, such as testing a new medication’s effectiveness. On the other hand, qualitative research provides depth when understanding patient perspectives, cultural influences, or emotional responses, which are equally important in patient-centered care.

NR 439 Week 4 Discussion: Designs

Exploring a Research Design Category

Among various research designs, quasi-experimental research stands out as an approach that blends scientific rigor with practical application. Unlike randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies may not use randomization but still evaluate interventions with a degree of control.

For example, in nursing practice, patients experiencing pain could first receive alternative therapies—such as music therapy, art therapy, massage, or hot/cold compresses—before resorting to pharmacological interventions. This design allows researchers to observe whether these non-pharmacological approaches reduce pain effectively while still maintaining structured evaluation. Such studies are beneficial in clinical settings where full experimental control is difficult but innovation in patient care is needed.

Analyzing Article Findings

In the Week 3 assignment, I utilized an article that followed a prospective cohort study design. This type of research requires careful planning and continuous monitoring of participants over a defined period. Importantly, the inclusion of a control group strengthens the study by reducing bias and allowing for meaningful comparison.

The article addressed my PICOT question:

“In adult surgical patients, what are the effects of chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) baths or wipes pre-op compared to not using CHG baths or wipes pre-op on surgical site infections within 30 days post-op?”

Graling and Vasaly (2013) reported that patients who received a 2% CHG cloth bath prior to surgery experienced a statistically significant reduction in surgical site infections compared to those who did not. These findings provide strong evidence supporting the integration of CHG bathing into preoperative care routines.

This research highlights the value of prospective cohort studies in generating reliable, measurable data that can guide nursing practice. By demonstrating unbiased outcomes, the study contributes to the advancement of evidence-based interventions aimed at improving surgical outcomes and patient safety.

References

Graling, P. R., & Vasaly, F. W. (2013). Effectiveness of 2% CHG cloth bathing for reducing surgical site infections. AORN Journal, 97(5), 547–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aorn.2013.02.009

NR 439 Week 4 Discussion: Designs

Houser, J. (2018). Nursing research: Reading, using, and creating evidence (4th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.