Critique of Systematic Review

Document Type:Thesis

Subject Area:Nursing

Document 1

The first group wanted to examine the upsides and downsides of alternative paths of short-term bladder catheterization in adults when it comes to infection, replacement, adverse events, duration of use, replacement, cost-effectiveness and participant satisfaction. The other group aimed at comparing the rates of POUR-postoperative urinary tract infection and UTI in patients undergoing an arthroplasty on the lower limbs after either intermittent urinary catheterization or indwelling urinary catheterization. There are similarities and differences regarding the methods and strategies that the two groups used. Both of the groups relied on nursing databases for compiling their systematic reviews. They both extracted material from Cochrane, while another increased their chances of finding more credible articles by visiting PubMed, Embase and other nursing databases while another group included conference reports.

Sign up to view the full document!

Instead, they included all quasi-randomized and randomized trials comparing the various routes of catheterization for short-term applications in hospital beds (Kidd et al. An observable similarity between the systematic reviews is that despite the fact that they were both published in 2015, most of the articles that were used for review were older than ten years with others being published as early as the 1980s, thus raising questions concerning their applicability in 30years afterward. Perhaps the researchers could have limited the search to recently published articles to sound relevant. However, the fact that it was an exercise carried by experts in the field of health and nursing thus adding to the level of confidence in their findings. Quality Evaluation The quality of a study provides the possibility that the findings are an estimate of the truth and can be applied in similar settings and to be considered as evidence-based by clinicians (Moore, 2013).

Sign up to view the full document!

Zhang and his colleagues also failed to give a consistent definition of POUR; such a factor could have weakened the process of analysis by creating biases. The authors also failed to stratify the participants regarding gender unlike Kidd’s because UTI is more common in women than men (Oestreich, 2012). The two studies relied on old articles with Kidd using articles as old as 1974 while Zhang and his colleagues had their earliest article published in 1988. The two studies used a randomized control trial technique to develop their conclusions. The advantages that are associated with RTC adds to the quality level of the studies. Zhang and colleagues were right in excluding quality of life, cost utility, and ease of use because the studies did not prove anything related to that.

Sign up to view the full document!

Their decision to exclude unfinished or undiscovered aspects from their generalization is also appropriate because the strength of evidence is a critical factor in identifying evidence-based practices (Etikan, 2017). The findings from the two systematic reviews show a lot of consistency thus making it easy for the authors to digest and classify the outcomes. The constancy in a study conducted by Zhang and his colleagues led to their conclusion that there was lack of variation in the rate of Urinary tract infection between intermittent and indwelling catheterization (Zhang et al. Consistency in findings is a typical way of approving the evidence obtained concerning a particular study exercise and will likely be considered as an evidence-based practice. Kidd and colleagues summarize their main results in a table that is characterized by numerous categories to represent the several aspects that they investigated.

Sign up to view the full document!

Such an approach is effective and makes it simple for an individual to know the results of the process without necessarily digging into the article. There were graphic representations of data thus proving a clear visual impression of the outcomes (Etikan, 2017). The authors also provided a risk bias summary in a table form thereby providing information concerning the biases involved in the various studies. The provision of the table concerning summaries of the study labeling multiple characteristics of the study provides a summary of the exercise in a simple step thus making it easy for one to understand the entire exercise quickly. , Stewart, F. , Kassis, N. , Hom, E. , & Omar, M. Urethral (indwelling or intermittent) or suprapubic routes for short-term catheterisation in hospitalised adults.

Sign up to view the full document!

From $10 to earn access

Only on Studyloop

Original template