NR 449 Unit 5 Assignment: RUA # 2: Group: Analyzing Published Research: Nursing Incivility (GAPRA) Paper.

Running Head: ANALYZING RESEARCH: INCIVILITY RUA: Analyzing Published Research: Nursing Incivility Chamberlain College of Nursing NR 449: Evidence-Based Practice Clinical Question ...

Running Head: ANALYZING RESEARCH: INCIVILITY RUA: Analyzing Published Research: Nursing Incivility Chamberlain College of Nursing NR 449: Evidence-Based Practice Clinical Question The Required Uniform Assignment delegated to Team Red is nursing incivility, which interprets as disruptive and undesirable behavior directed by a nurse, and presented to a fellow nurse, patient, student, or management in a healthcare setting. The Red team’s focus is to analyze the negative implications nursing incivility has on novice nurses, as this form of harassment conditions nurses in underperforming their work assignments due to the unpleasant environment. As evidenced by the Joint Commission, 22% of nurses report intentional decreased work efforts, while 28% report lost productivity because they spent time at work avoiding the situation and instigator [2016]. The PICOT question formulated by Team Red is: Within the first year of employment, does productivity among new nurses increase in an amiable work environment, compared to working in a hostile environment? The purpose of this paper is to analyze the two identified articles from the Week 3 RUA that precisely respond to the devised PICOT question. One article from the medical research site, Science direct, constructs a qualitative analysis of the interviews given to nurses in the hopes of helping to eradicate workplace harassment. In contrast, the other article from a research company examines researchers’ observations of nurses and their supervisors to quantify and give importance to the study being conducted. Description of Findings Concepts In the qualitative study, the analysis is established through identified interviews. The questions asked disclose the nurses’ opinions on the direct treatment received during their work day. The concept of the interrogation is to correlate nurses’ work performance to the treatment procured. For instance, are the nurses outperforming in their daily work life because of the appreciation they receive? Or are they underperforming because of the hostile environment they endure on a daily basis? The interview regulates the notability of assimilating how nurses’ treatment can lead to a decrease in patient-centered care. Similar to the analyzed interviews, the quantitative study conveys the same comprehensible concept, but utilizes observable data, such as behavior and actions, to represent the substantial importance of the research. For instance, 31% of nurses were discounted by their colleagues and supervisors for exceeding expectations and requirements [Smith, Morin, & Lake 2017]. The statistical data conceptualizes the rationale behind the research being conducted, and the overall purpose of the RUA subject. Methods The qualitative article utilizes the interview method, similar to work interviews. The nurses were told about the anonymity of the interview. In addition, they were informed of the purpose behind the research. They were required to sign a consent form in order to participate. The interview took about 30-45 minutes, and was divide into four (incivility) categories: coworkers, supervisors, doctors, and patients (including families) [Edmonson, Bolick, & Lee 2017]. In contrast, the qualitative article was based solely on observation of the hospital floor. The institution gave the researcher permission to observe the floor. The study was conducted in a consistent manner, as they would do it in the mornings every week, on the same day. They studied the behaviors and actions of nurses around their supervisors, as well as the work-based interactions [Smith, Morin, & Lake 2017]. Participants The participants interviewed in the qualitative article were first-year nurses working in the Medical City Dallas Hospital in Texas. The contributors included 100 nurses selected through conscious sampling over two years, in order to collect precise amount of data needed to conduct the study. In comparison, the quantitative article from the Center of Health Outcomes and Policy Research in Pennsylvania conducted a broader-spectrum research. The study included nurses, as well as their colleagues and supervisors. The distinction between the qualitative study and the quantitative study is the qualitative research studies the nurses’ individual perspective separate from their clinical community, whereas the quantitative research focuses on the clinical community as an entity, rather than individual opinions. Instruments The qualitative study collected subjective data by utilizing interviews as instruments. Through the interviews, researchers uncovered meaningful thought processes when nurses incited substantial key topics [Edmonson, Bolick, & Lee 2017]. Furthermore, it evoked discussion by providing a pavement for open-ended communication. In comparison, the quantitative data utilized more of an observation perspective as the main instrument. This helped in detailing how the nurses handled situations through an unbiased manner. Unlike the other article, it didn’t examine any opinions, but rather, examined actions hard to describe. For instance, sometimes demeanor such as eye-rolling, sighing loudly, or speaking loudly may not be noted by the instigator, but can be observed by overseeing the situation [Smith, Morin, & Lake 2017]. In both articles, the authors mentioned that the research conducted is reliable, as the subjects involved were studied through a consistent measurement, such as the same state institution. Furthermore, the research was valid, as the production of the study’s outcome directly meets the objective of the research. Purpose The qualitative article gave several different perspectives on the clinical question at-hand. The analysis provided substantial evidence to correlate the treatment of nurses to job satisfaction and morale. Through this paper, it is determined the article answers that a nurse’s positive performance in their work life is due to the positive reinforcement they receive [Edmonson, Bolick, & Lee 2017]. On the contrary, the quantitative analysis gave a rationale to why studying workplace incivility is important to understanding patient-centered care. Although the statistics paved its way for proof, the article is not sufficient enough to use for the next RUA. The authors need to determine a direct relationship between behavior and treatment before the research can be utilized. The next step for Team Red is to examine the articles that are most relevant when answering the devised PICOT question using evidence-based practice. The articles selected should detail enough evidence to support the topic’s significance and the reason behind the significance, such as the quantitative data examined. Once identified, the team will make a PowerPoint giving a solution to the clinical problem. Conclusion The purpose of this paper was to analyze two articles and determine whether they answer the PICOT question. The first article was a qualitative analysis of the interviews that directly correlate nurses’ opinions of their work satisfaction to the treatment they receive. This article was determined to be an effective evidence-based research. In contrast, the other article was based off of observations that determined a data value. The article will not be used for further study, as it does provide substantial evidence. Matrix Table Article Reference Purpose Hypothesis Research Question Variables: Independent (IV) Dependent (DV) Study Design Sample Size Selection Data collection methods Major Findings 1. Edmonson, C., Purpose: To provide sufficient evidence in order to correlate the treatment of nurses to job satisfaction and morale Research Question: Does the treatment of nurses affect their work performance? Hypothesis: Nurses in a hostile environment perform less due to the negative reinforcement. IV: Interview questions DV: Answers to interview questions P: New nurses I: Civil environment C: Nurses not in a bad environment O: Employee engagement T: One year Qualitative: Based on analysis of the interview questions (collaborati ve) Sample: 100 nurses. The sample was comprised of new nurses at the Medical City Dallas Hospital (Texas). Selection: 100 nurses were selected through conscious sampling over a period of two years. The sample size is sufficient enough, as nurses have different experiences and can provide different perspectives. Furthermore, this also rules out nurses with very unique experiences, not relevant to the study. Interview method: anonymity of the interview, explained the purpose, consent form, etc. 30-45 minutes per interview 4 categories: coworkers, supervisors, doctors, and patients (including families) Correlates the treatment of nurses to job satisfaction and morale: Nurse’s positive performance relates to positive reinforcemen t Negative reinforcemen t leads to negative performance Bolick, B., & Lee, J. (2017). A Moral Imperative for Nurse Leaders: Addressing Incivility and Bullying in Health Care. Nurse Leader, 1540- 44. doi:10.1016/j.m nl.2016.07.012 ANALYZING RESEARCH: INCIVILITY 2. Smith, J. G., Morin, K. H., & Lake, E. T. (2017). Association of the nurse work environment with nurse incivility in hospitals. Jour nal Of Nursing Management, doi:10.1111/jon m.12537 Purpose: Rationale to why studying workplace incivility is important to understanding decreased patient-centered care Research Question: There is no identified question. Hypothesis: There is no identified hypothesis. IV: The setting, hospital, nurses, supervisors, etc. DV: Observation s inc. actions and behaviors Quantitative : the study was done, they measured values. Example: 31% of nurses deal with harassment from supervisors on a daily basis Sample: The Center of Health Outcomes and Policy Research (Penn. State) conducted a broader- spectrum research: nurses, colleagues and supervisors. Observation of the hospital floor. The institution gave the researcher permission. Consistent manner: in the mornings every week, on the same day. Studied the behaviors and actions, and work-based interactions Studying workplace incivility important to understandin g patient- centered care. Running Head: ANALYZING RESEARCH: INCIVILITY Reference: Edmonson, C., Bolick, B., & Lee, J. (2017). A Moral Imperative for Nurse Leaders: Addressing Incivility and Bullying in Health Care. Nurse Leader, 1540-44. doi:10.1016/j.mnl.2016.07.012 Joint Commission. (2016, June 8). Bullying Has No Place in the Healthcare. Retrieved January 12, 2018, from https://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/23/Quick_Safety_Issue_24_June_2016.pdf Smith, J. G., Morin, K. H., & Lake, E. T. (2017). Association of the nurse work environment with nurse incivility in hospitals. Journal Of Nursing Management, doi:10.1111/jonm.12537 This study source was downloaded by 100000829957125 from CourseHero.com on 10-27-2021 23:07:29 GMT -05:00