Introducing a form to ensure that, for example, heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation and temperature are noted in the assessment of chest infections in primary care Subsequently, it is necessary to consider how trainees will know whether a change resulted in an improvement. This means that baseline data must be collected. This may be done retrospectively. Is subjective (each person has their own perspective and each perspective counts). Recognizes the subjectivity of the experience of not only the participant but also the researcher Allotey, P., Allotey-Reidpath, C. and Reidpath, D. (2017) ‘Gender bias in clinical case reports: A cross-sectional study of the big five’, Medical Journals, 12(5), pp.13-18. As previously discussed, selection bias occurred through the non-probability sample method used, thus reducing reliability. In contrast, the researchers were unknown to the participants and their involvement was voluntary, consequently reducing bias.

Creswell J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. [ Google Scholar] Quality Improvement Project (QIP) [Internet]. Royal College of General Practitioners. 2021 [cited 17 May 2021]. Available from: https://www.rcgp.org.uk/training-exams/training/new-wpba/qip.aspx Glaser B. G., Strauss A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Transaction. [ Google Scholar] Evaluation of the studies suggested that they adopted appropriate research governance when conducting their individual researches. In-line with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki (2014), the authors ensured that their studies were approved by their individual human research ethics committee. Additionally, to protect the participant’s rights and welfare, the ethical standard was upheld by the researchers as each participant was informed of the aim of the study, and both oral and written consent was also obtained from them. This was to enable the participants to make a voluntary decision either to accept or decline to participate in research (Peter, 2015). Also, confidentiality was ensured as there was a de-identification of the participants during data entry into the electronic secured database, and this is in line with the ethical principles in conducting research (Parahoo, 2014; Novak, 2014). Effective use of the research ethics is part of promoting patient’s rights, thereby observing the Helsinki’s Declaration. Beauchamp and Childress (2012) stressed that research ethics of autonomy is upheld when participants can independently decide whether to participate in a research or not. In view of the four studies, they respected the right to patient’s autonomy and ensure their safety during the research process. Carlsson and Gunningberg (2017) study elaborated more on transparency, as it provided the participants with options to voluntarily withdraw from the study at any time without explanation. The goal of qualitative description research is not “discovery” as is the case in grounded theory, not to “explain” or “seeking to understand” as with ethnography, not to “explore a process” as is a case study or “describe the experiences” as is expected in phenomenology ( Doody & Bailey, 2016). Qualitative description research seeks instead to provide a rich description of the experience depicted in easily understood language ( Sullivan-Bolyai et al., 2005). The researcher seeks to discover and understand a phenomenon, a process, or the perspectives and worldviews of the people involved ( Caelli et al., 2003). A qualitative description approach, therefore, offers the opportunity to gather rich descriptions about a phenomenon which little may be known about. Within the process, the researcher strives to stay close to the “surface of the data and events” ( Sandelowski, 2000, p. 336), where the experience is described from the viewpoint of the participants ( Sullivan-Bolyai et al., 2005).

Footnotes

Jervis, M. and Drake, M. (2014) ‘The Use of Qualitative Research Methods in Quantitative Science: A Review’, Journal of Sensory Studies, 29(4), pp.234-247.

Colorafi K. J., Evans B. (2016). Qualitative descriptive methods in health science research. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 9( 4), 16-25. [ PMC free article] [ PubMed] [ Google Scholar] At the end of the QIP, trainees should present their findings to the team at a practice meeting. This may include an evaluation of why a change has not resulted in improvement. They should also attempt to make effective changes permanent. Additionally, trainees are required to reflect on their learning and identify points for improvement. Rylance, R., Daye, S., Chiocchi, A., Jones, A., Jones, G., Harper, A., Potter, M., Reece, C. and Caldwell, K. (2017). Do third-year mental health nursing students feel prepared to assess physical health? Mental Health Practice. 20 (10), pp. 26-30. DOI: 10.7748/mhp.2017.e1147. There is a myriad of qualitative approaches to research. Yet, the researcher may be confronted with a question or a topic that belongs within the qualitative paradigm but does not correspond neatly with approaches that are well documented and clearly delineated. Within the literature, various terms have been used to describe research that does not fit within a traditional qualitative approach. Thorne, Kirkham, and MacDonald-Emes (1997) define “interpretive description” as a “noncategorical” qualitative research approach (p. 169). Merriam (1998) refers to this type of research as “basic or generic qualitative research” (p. 20) and Sandelowski (2000, p. 335, 2010) explores what she calls “basic or fundamental qualitative description.” Exploratory research is the umbrella term used by Brink and Wood (2001) to describe all description qualitative research and suggest it “is a Level 1 research endeavor” (p. 85), and Savin-Baden and Howell Major (2013) refer to a pragmatic qualitative approach. This interchangeable use of terms creates ambiguity and confusion in relation to qualitative description research as a methodology in its own right. Reference to “interpretive” as described by Thorne et al. (1997) can cause confusion with phenomenology, for example, and Savin-Baden and Howell Major’s (2013) use of a “pragmatic qualitative approach” might suggest that if all else fails, the researcher should adopt a pragmatic approach. There are numerous databases to apply the search strategy to, for relevance of nursing research, CINAHL and MEDLINE have been chosen for their credibility, and range of sources (Figure 4) (Booth et al., 2016).McCabe J. L., Holmes D. (2009). Reflexivity, critical qualitative research and emancipation: A Foucauldian perspective. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 65, 1518–1526. [ PubMed] [ Google Scholar] As the four studies were conducted in different countries, the nurse’s cultures, values, beliefs about management and prevention of PUs may be different from the experience and knowledge of the nurses in the United Kingdom (UK). Therefore, one will be cautious while applying the findings to the healthcare settings in the UK as there may be differences in the PU treatment guidelines, protocols and policies. The International Council for Nurses (ICN) emphasis on the need for nurses to apply the evidence from clinical literatures which have an informed basis for their clinical decisions (ICN, 2012). Adoption of evidence-based practice (EBP) by the nurses is vital because they are directly involved in the management and treatment of PUs as part of a multidisciplinary team approach in various healthcare settings (Lehane et al., 2018). However, King Funds(2018) argues thatalthough the guidelines and research evidence are used in the management of PU’s in the UK, the quality of the treatment provided by individual nurses varies. As a result, there is a need to explore the attitude and knowledge of nurses on prevention and treatment, as well as the barriers which impact on the nurse’s management of PUs. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE, 2018) guideline emphasised on transparent treatment, quality improvement and outcome measurement. The guideline enables the nurses to improve healthcare and reduce inequalities in health treatment by effective adoption of evidence-based practice (EBP). Hence, the effective application of EBP in healthcare management is crucial in reducing avoidable PUs and promoting patient safety. This is important as research findings aids improvement of policies and practices in nursing, and research evidences help to reduce the rate and risk of PU development in patients and provides the necessary support needed for the treatment ( Lehane et al., 2018). Another way to assess the generalisability of research is to calculate confidence intervals (CI) (Aveyard, 2019). CI are a range of values based on the sample population, which estimates the precision of the findings applied to the wider population (Lo-Biondo Wood and Haber, 2017). A larger sample size will effectively create a more precise CI, 95% or above is the threshold; supporting the generalisation of the findings to the target population (Jirojwong et al., 2014). The researchers did not account for CI. Parahoo, K. (2014). Nursing Research: Principles, Process and Issues. 3 rd ed. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Stanley M. (2015). Qualitative description: A very good place to start. In Nayar S., Stanley M. (Eds.), Qualitative research methodologies for occupational science and therapy (pp. 21–36). New York: Routledge. [ Google Scholar]