Research Critique, Part 2
Research Critique, Part 2
Grand Canyon University
Introduction to Nursing Research
NRS 433V
2012
Research Critique, Part 2
This research critique is an article called Comparison of suture types in the closure of scalp wounds written by Joseph Bonham and published in Emergency Nurse. In the emergency room two different types of sutures permanent and non permanent sutures are used as well as glue for lacerations. Scalp wounds are difficult as pressure to wound as well as the hair of the scalp. The research discusses the end result of the research the amount of scaring left after the wound has healed.
Protection of Human Participants
The benefits of the participation of this study for participants is to see if there can be a more cost effective way of a emergency room visit for sutures in a laceration. The risk is that the authors only had nine months to complete the study and this did not give ample time to assess the final healed laceration properly. With this quantitative study each of the participants agreed to sign a consent form and then randomly put into two experimental groups. The study was approved by the ethical approval from St James’s Hospital ethics committee, management and senior clinicians before starting. It would have seemed that the participants were asked upon emergency room arrival if they would participate in the study. Upon completion of the health record inclusion and exclusion must be met for participants.
Data Collection
The major variable is the participants must have a scalp laceration and gone to the emergency department within a nine month period of time of the study. Two envelopes containing information sheet, two consent forms, a head injury information sheet and tracing sheet and either absorbable sutures and non-absorbable sutures were randomly selected when patients arrived with a scalp laceration. The author did not discuss as to why they chose this method. I would venture to say they did not want the staff in the
Grand Canyon University
Introduction to Nursing Research
NRS 433V
2012
Research Critique, Part 2
This research critique is an article called Comparison of suture types in the closure of scalp wounds written by Joseph Bonham and published in Emergency Nurse. In the emergency room two different types of sutures permanent and non permanent sutures are used as well as glue for lacerations. Scalp wounds are difficult as pressure to wound as well as the hair of the scalp. The research discusses the end result of the research the amount of scaring left after the wound has healed.
Protection of Human Participants
The benefits of the participation of this study for participants is to see if there can be a more cost effective way of a emergency room visit for sutures in a laceration. The risk is that the authors only had nine months to complete the study and this did not give ample time to assess the final healed laceration properly. With this quantitative study each of the participants agreed to sign a consent form and then randomly put into two experimental groups. The study was approved by the ethical approval from St James’s Hospital ethics committee, management and senior clinicians before starting. It would have seemed that the participants were asked upon emergency room arrival if they would participate in the study. Upon completion of the health record inclusion and exclusion must be met for participants.
Data Collection
The major variable is the participants must have a scalp laceration and gone to the emergency department within a nine month period of time of the study. Two envelopes containing information sheet, two consent forms, a head injury information sheet and tracing sheet and either absorbable sutures and non-absorbable sutures were randomly selected when patients arrived with a scalp laceration. The author did not discuss as to why they chose this method. I would venture to say they did not want the staff in the
References: Bonham, J. (2011). Comparison of suture types in the closure of scalp wounds. Emergency Nurse, 19(3), 34-39. Coughlan, M., Cronin, P., & Ryan, F. (2007). Step by step guide to critiquing research. British Journal of Nursing, 16(11), 658-663.