CAUTIs Prevention.
Which is better, antiseptic solutions or sterile water?
My research question is; Is the use of antiseptic solutions for periurethral cleaning before a catheter is inserted more effective than the use of sterile water in CAUTIs Prevention (Gould et al., 2009)? The research question will be an experimental research question because I will be manipulating the independent or control variable and measuring the outcome variable for any defect. Our predictor or independent variable for the research question is method of sterilization, measured as antiseptic solutions and saline water. The control group or the participants will be randomly assigned to one of the two variables. After the participants are randomly assigned to the independent variables and the independent variables are manipulated, the outcome variable, CAUTIs Prevention, will be measured (Formplus Blog, 2020).
The predictor variables are qualitative because they cannot be measured. In addition, the predictor variable can be classified as nominal because they can be categorized, however, they cannot be ranked, evenly spaced and lack a natural zero. On the other hand, the outcome variable is measured as the number of reported CAUTIs and is, therefore, a quantitative variable. The dependent variable can be categorized, ranked, evenly spaced, and has a natural zero, so it is measured as a ratio (Specht, 2014). A natural zero is when there is a possibility of zero quantities or in this case, cases of CAUTIs being presented (Bhandari, 2021).
A comparative research design will be used for the research question because we will be comparing the mean differences in CAUTIs cases for the two control groups. If the groups were pre-existing variables (gender, ethnicity, employment status, etc.), meaning they cannot be randomly assigned, we would have used a quasi-experimental research design. Therefore, the best inferential test for our research question would be an independent T-test; because we have only two control groups being manipulated and one outcome variable being measured.
The advantage that will be encountered in the statistical analysis is all our variables are clearly stated and explained; therefore, there is no chance of reaching a wrong conclusion. Also, we are only doing one major inferential test, which means our research design is not complicated. Finally, the test results will also guide nurses in the future on the best nursing practices to use when it comes to CAUTIs Prevention.
The main disadvantage of this research is that we cannot determine the cause-effect of the comparison since we are using an experimental research design. Experimental research design only identify differences and relationships between variable, but not identify the cause-effect relationship. Other external or unmeasured variables might be causing significant or insignificant results and we have no way of knowing if that is the case. Our sample might also be too small to power our study and make it hard for us to reach any significant conclusion (Simmons, 2018).
References
Specht, D. M. (2014). A beginning looks at research findings. Nursing2020 Critical Care, 9(1), 9-11.
Bhandari, P. (2021, January 27). Levels of measurement | Nominal, ordinal, interval and ratio. Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/statistics/levels-of-measurement/
Formplus Blog. (2020, January 24). Experimental vs non-experimental research: 15 key differences. Create Free Online Forms & Surveys in 2 Mins | Formplus. https://www.formpl.us/blog/experimental-non-experimental-research
Gould, C. V., Umscheid, C. A., Agarwal, R. K., Kuntz, G., & Pegues, D. A. (2009). Guideline for Prevention Of Catheter associated Urinary Tract Infections. Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. https://www.cdc.gov/infectioncontrol/pdf/guidelines/cauti-guidelines-H.pdf
Simmons, A. E. (2018, May 14). How to select a statistically significant sample size. Sciencing. https://sciencing.com/select-statistically-significant-sample-size-2410.html
Leave a Reply