Evidence-Based Prevention of Surgical Site Infections
This paper presents a critical analysis of quantitative research articles by Qasem & Hweidi (2017), as well as Mohsen et al. (2020). The purpose of the first study was to assess Jordanian caregivers’ understanding of evidence-based prevention of surgical site infections (SSIs). Additionally, the authors aimed to determine the most crucial predictors of nurses’ abilities in evidence-based control of SSIs. The objective of the study was to describe how nurses’ knowledge is related to selected sociodemographic factors. On the other hand, Mohsen et al. (2020) purposed to assess how nurses comply with SSI control measures, apart from determining the barriers hindering adherence to the guidelines. The main objective was to determine the level of knowledge of SSI prevention guidelines among nurses working in surgical units.
The studies answer the PICOT Question: Could operating room nurses use evidence-based nursing care to prevent Surgical Site Infections and reduce patient exposure to these issues, alleviating their subsequent rising costs for the workplace? The significance of Mohsen et al. (2020) in the nursing practice is to prove that sociodemographic factors such as caregivers’ knowledge, age, and experience affect their compliance with SSI prevention rules. Qasem & Hweidi (2017) is fundamental in informing further research on the nursing practice regarding the factors influencing caregivers’ knowledge of evidence-based care to prevent SSIs.
- SSIs are common in healthcare facilities, and therefore there is need to improve nurses’ knowledge of infection control measures (Qasem & Hweidi, 2017).
- SSIs comprise the most prevalent hospital acquired infections, implying that caregivers’ compliance with SSI prevention guidelines should be evaluated to improve the quality of care (Mohsen et al., 2020).
Research Questions (Qasem & Hweidi, 2017, par. 11)
“What is the level of Jordanian nurses’ knowledge regarding evidence based guidelines for the prevention of SSIs in acute care settings?”
Research Question (Mohsen et al., 2020, par. 12)
“What is the level of Nurses’ knowledge regarding prevention of surgical site infection Guidelines?”
How the Studies Support Nurse Practice
- Population: Operating room nurses and patients.
- Interventions: Evidence-based nursing care.
- Comparison: The relationship between nurses’ knowledge and SSIs prevention.
- Outcome: Prevention of SSIs and reduction of patient exposure to them.
- Time: Data collection period.
The articles are relevant in addressing the PICOT question in a number of ways. For instance, Qasem & Hweidi (2017) ask, “Is there any association between nurses’ knowledge regarding evidence based guidelines for the prevention of SSIs in acute care settings and selected sociodemographics measured as continuous variables?” (Par. 11). Mohsen et al. (2020) compare the level nurses’ understanding of SSI prevention and their compliance with mitigation guidelines. Regarding the populations, Mohsen et al. (2020) used inclusion and exclusion criteria, whereby regular nurses and those who voluntarily consented to participate were included. The researchers exempted caregivers in the managerial positions, students, and those who declined to participate in the study. On the other hand, Qasem & Hweidi (2017) recruited 200 registered nurses from four hospitals working in acute care units. The subjects were older than 20 years, holding a bachelor’s degree and above. They were Jordanian nationals and heir English literacy was efficient.
The timeliness of these studies also address the last aspect of the PICOT question, which describes the duration of data collection. Mohsen et al. (2020) conducted the research between July and November in 2019, while Qasem & Hweidi (2017) gathered information between the last weeks of September throughout October 2015. They randomly visited the selected facilities in the morning, at noon, and in the evenings to ensure that they found eligible participants.
The nurses filled questionnaires within 15 minutes and returned them at the same visit time. From the PICOT question, the intervention is evidence-based, which is consistent with Mohsen et al. (2020), who conducted self-reported surveys from caregivers in selected hospitals. According to Qasem & Hweidi (2017), the subjects that met the inclusion criteria consented to participate in the study and answered various multiple-choice questions. Therefore, the articles are relevant to the subject of the PICOT question because the outcomes are measurable, and the researchers provided ethical issues such as participants’ consent.
The first article by Qasem & Hweidi (2017) used a cross-sectional design, and nurses from four hospitals participated. The authors calculated this sample size using power analysis with a significance level of 80%, an error of 0.05, and confidence interval of 95% (Qasem & Hweidi, 2017). The researchers targeted acute care settings, including medical intensive care units, coronary intensive care units, surgical intensive care units, as well as orthopedic and surgical wards. They used a demographic datasheet to collect population data, such as gender, age, nationality, years of work experience, surgical related training, marital status, monthly income, and education level. The authors presented multiple-choice questionnaires to test the nurses’ knowledge.
The second article employed a cross-sectional descriptive research, which involved self-reported survey. Mohsen et al. (2020) collected data from surgical units in four hospitals located in Egypt. The sample size was estimated using the Raosoft calculator, which used a marginal error of 0.05, 95% confidence level, and a population of 20,000 (Mohsen et al., 2020). Furthermore, it was crucial to compensate for the low nurse response rate, and therefore the authors included 450 nurses. Respondents of different age, gender, and years of work experience completed and returned some questionnaires.
Both articles used a cross-sectional study design, which captures information from participants with different characteristics. The key advantage of a cross-sectional study is that the findings approve or disapprove study assumptions, which informs in-depth research. However, the design cannot assess behavior over a specified period because it captures information at a particular time, while other variables such as income, experience, and age change with time.
From Qasem & Hweidi (2017), the knowledge score of nurses was 3.28, and the authors found significant difference in the understanding of caregivers at intensive care units and those attending other departments. Kaya & Karaca (2018) found that nurses’ abilities and years of practice are crucial in addressing diabetic foot needs, which is consistent with Adib Hajbaghery & Eshraghi Arani (2018). Therefore, the key predictors of knowledge include the period the nurses pursued surgical related courses and the years of professional experience. Mohsen e al. (2020) found a compliance mean score of 13.01, implying that most of the nurses had poor practice and knowledge of SSI.
The key implications of these studies in the nursing practice include the need to provide a professional compliance model for SSI prevention guidelines, training and education of staff to improve their knowledge of evidence-based care. The articles suggest that continuous monitoring and evaluation of surgical units is crucial to ensure that nurses adhere to SSI control measures.
The anticipated outcomes for the PICOT question include the significance of evidence-based care in controlling SSI, an elaboration of how scientific care prevents patient exposure to SSI, as well as how research-based treatment reduces costs. According to the World Health Organization (2018), evidence is crucial in orthopedic and cardiothoracic care units. The author recommends that patients in these facilities receive the correct intranasal drugs because the nasal cavity provides optimum conditions for the colonization of S. aureus (World Health Organization, 2018). Regarding the outcomes for the PICOT question, the articles proved that evidence-based nursing is crucial in preventing SSI. Poor knowledge of SSI contributed to more facility related diseases among patients.
Adib Hajbaghery, M., & Eshraghi Arani, N. (2018). Assessing nurses’ clinical competence from their own viewpoint and the viewpoint of head nurses: A descriptive study. Iran Journal of Nursing, 31(111), 52-64. Web.
Kaya, Z., & Karaca, A. (2018). Evaluation of nurses’ knowledge levels of diabetic foot care management. Nursing Research and Practice, 2018. Web.
Mohsen, M. H., Riad, N. A., & Badawy, A. I. (2020). Compliance and barriers facing nurses with surgical site infection prevention guidelines. Scientific Research, 10(1). Web.
Qasem, M. N., & Hweidi, I. M. (2017). Jordanian nurses’ knowledge of preventing surgical site infections in acute care settings. Scientific Research, 7(5). Web.
World Health Organization. (2018). Global guidelines for the prevention of surgical site infection (2nd ed.). Web.