Registerd Nurse

Research Critique, Part 2

Research Critique, Part 2
Protection of Human Participants There are of course benefits and risks to any medical procedure, although the participants who were included in this study needed the central line placed due to a medical reason not just to participate in this study so the risks and benefits were explained to each and every patient at the time of the procedure unless the central line was put in during an emergent situation (Boyce, Nadeau, Dumigan, Miller, Dubowsky, Reilly, & Hannon, 2013). The participants who were in this study were informed and asked for permission if they could be used for data collection and if their cases could be followed up on for the extent of the time the central line is in place (Boyce et al., 2013). If the patients did not want to participate in the study their cases would not be utilized and no data collected form these individuals (Boyce et al., 2013). I do not believe there were any benefits or risks that were not covered by the authors, as I mentioned earlier all the people who were included in the study needed the central line for medical purposes and not for the solo purpose of this study. And the collection of this data did not put the patients at any more risk for anything than they already have from the central line. It was not mentioned about the researchers having permission from the institutions review board prior to conducting the study but for such a large amount of participants and data to be included in the study one would assume permission was requested and granted prior to the beginning of the study.
Data Collection
The major variables were not directly identified, but for the purpose of this research article the independent variable would be the fact that all participants have a central catheter placed for some period of time to treat a medical condition. The dependent variables would be the places which the catheter was placed and cared for as well as the

References: Boyce, J. M., Nadeau, J., Dumigan, D., Miller, D., Dubowsky, C., Reilly, L., & Hannon, C. V. (2013). Obtaining Blood Cultures by Venipuncture versus from Central Lines: Impact on Blood Culture Contamination Rates and Potential Effect on Central Line—Associated Bloodstream Infection Reporting. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 34(10), 1042-1047. doi:10.1086/673142 Quach, C., Milstone, A. M., Perpête, C., Bonenfant, M., Moore, D. L., & Perreault, T. (2014). Chlorhexidine Bathing in a Tertiary Care Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: Impact on Central Line--Associated Bloodstream Infections. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 35(2), 158-163. doi:10.1086/674862 Tedja, R., Gordon, S. M., Fatica, C., & Fraser, T. G. (2014). The Descriptive Epidemiology of Central Line--Associated Bloodstream Infection among Patients in Non-Intensive Care Unit Settings. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 35(2), 164-168. doi:10.1086/674856