Draft Qualitative Research Critique

ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT:  Draft Qualitative Research Critique  

Draft Qualitative Research Critique

Patient engagement, which involves actions that people take for their health and benefit from care, plays an instrumental role in improving health outcomes. Through patient portals, patients can closely engage their health care providers through secure messaging and other means of interaction. Patients can also access educational materials and advice, enabling them to manage their illnesses better. However, many challenges hamper the use of patient portals among adults. Issues to do with experience, convenience, and perceived benefits are common hindrances. This paper is a critical appraisal of qualitative research studies exploring the use of patient portals in health care settings.

Background of Study

Patient portals are perceived as a critical segment of the care ecosystem that patients and care providers use for individual and collaborative activities. The article by Sieck et al. (2018) provides qualitative research on the connection between patients’ experience, perception, and use of patient portals. This study is centered on the premise that experience affects perception, which further determines how adult patients use patient portals. Accordingly, the use of patient portals can be maximized if factors that motivate users can be known. Overall, the study examined perspectives on patient portal use for collaboration and engagement among experienced users. The research question was about elements that motivate patients to use patient portals to manage care and improve relationships with providers.

Portz et al. (2019) also explored the use of patient portals in health care settings qualitatively. In this study, patient portals are described as vital digital tools that enable older adults with multiple chronic conditions to engage in health management. Unfortunately, as the research problem, barriers to portal adoption among older adults are widespread and hamper effective use. User interface and experience are common barriers that should be addressed in nursing practice to improve portal adoption. The study used the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to qualitatively describe user interface, experience, and behaviors among older patients with multiple chronic conditions. The research question was whether patient portals’ user experience affects their use among elderly patients with chronic illnesses.

How the Articles Support the Nurse Practice Issue

The two articles will help answer my PICOT question by explaining the areas that patient education should address to improve patient portal use among adults with diabetes. Sieck et al. (2018) noted that experience improves portals use, and portals are better used for collaboration and engagement when users are motivated to use them. By showing how user experience and user interface can be improved, Portz et al. (2019) show how to better engage older adults by addressing barriers to portal adoption. In this case, the articles describe what should be done to encourage patients to use patient portals, which forms the foundation of patient education.

Concerning interventions and comparison groups, the studies use different approaches and research elements to evaluate the differences between the intervention and control groups, if any. In the study by Sieck et al. (2018), the intervention group was composed of patients with experience in using MyChart as the patient-provider engagement tool. In the study by Portz et al. (2019), the study group included patients over 65 years with multiple chronic conditions using MY Health Manager for the patient-provider experience. These intervention groups share, to a huge extent, similar characteristics with the group identified in the PICOT question. My group of interest is adults with diabetes not maximizing patient portals’ use, whose limiting factors have been explored in the two articles.

Method of Study

Despite being qualitative, the studies differ in data collection approaches. Portz et al. (2019) primarily relied on focus groups (semi-structured), while Sieck et al. (2018) used semi-structured interviews. In a focus group, a skilled moderator facilitates a discussion with the selected group of participants. Semi-structured interviews are characterized by the researcher asking more open-ended questions to the participants instead of following a strictly formalized list of questions. One of the main benefits of focus groups is that the researcher can clarify pre-conceived notions. However, opinions can be biased since participants may not provide honest and personal views about the issue of interest. On the other hand, semi-structured interviews provide more in-depth information through open-ended responses. However, the method is time-consuming since a significant number of participants must be interviewed to enable the researcher to draw valid conclusions and make comparisons.

Results of Study

Portz et al. (2019) found that portal users had favorite sections depending on the intended use, with the email, pharmacy, and lab sections of the portal being the commonly used sections. Despite patients’ commitment to using portals, challenges to log-ins user interface design, and some portals’ specific features were identified as common hindrances to effective portal use for patient-provider engagement and health knowledge. In this study, participants indicated that they perceived patient portals positively since they improved patient-provider communication, saved time and money, and were highly reliable in providing health information relevant to their health issues.

Sieck et al. (2018) focused on perspectives on portal use. In this study, logistical and psychological benefits were identified as the main reasons for patient portals’ use among experienced users. On logistical benefits, Sieck et al. (2018) found that portals’ features such as enabling patients to track their health information, communication, and better communication motivated them to use portals. Psychological benefits included a greater sense of collaboration in care and enhanced engagement of health care services. As a result, patients must perceive portals positively, implying that benefits related to using should be clear and ease of use guaranteed.

The two studies have huge implications in nursing practice. The current nursing practice is highly dependent on technology, and patients should be encouraged to use technology to enhance health outcomes. Engaging and educating patients via patient portals improve health outcomes to a huge extent. Accordingly, as Sieck et al. (2018) suggested, health care providers should improve all mechanisms that increase patient engagement in health care. In agreement with Portz et al. (2019), providers should be keen on promoting usefulness and ease of use as far as patient portals are concerned. Overall, the studies show that patient needs should be addressed to improve their engagement in health management.

Ethical Considerations

Health research should comply with the set ethical guidelines. Common ethical considerations when conducting research include informed consent and beneficence. Informed consent means that participants should participate in the research freely with full information about the implications of participating in the research. Beneficence has all to do with keeping participants free from harm. The researchers in the two articles adhere to these principles. They informed participants what it meant to engage in research and sought approval from the relevant authorizing bodies before commencing their research. Beneficence is factored in by ensuring that all participants were of sound mind and children excluded. Children are viewed as legally incompetent to provide valid consent, and including them in research can be emotionally or mentally harmful.

In conclusion, patients should be helped to improve their engagement in health management when facing challenges. Concerning adults with diabetes, they should be helped better to manage their health through patient-provider interaction via patient portals. Due to health literacy issues, experience levels, perception, portals’ configuration, among other factors, patient education is crucial to address knowledge gaps hampering patient portals’ use among older adults. The two articles show how to maximize portals’ use in adults with different illnesses.

References

Portz, J. D., Bayliss, E. A., Bull, S., Boxer, R. S., Bekelman, D. B., Gleason, K., & Czaja, S. (2019). Using the technology acceptance model to explore user experience, intent to use, and use behavior of a patient portal among older adults with multiple chronic conditions: descriptive qualitative study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 21(4), e11604. doi: 10.2196/11604

Sieck, C. J., Hefner, J. L., & McAlearney, A. S. (2018). Improving the patient experience through patient portals: Insights from experienced portal users. Patient Experience Journal, 5(3), 47-54. doi: https://doi.org/10.35680/2372-0247.1269

Details:

Use the practice problem and a qualitative, peer-reviewed research article you identified in the Topic 1 assignment to complete this assignment. (Attached)

In a 1000-1,250 word essay, summarize the study, explain the ways in which the findings might be used in nursing practice, and address ethical considerations associated with the conduct of the study.

Refer to the resource “Research Critique Guidelines” for suggested headings and content for your paper.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. NRS-433V-RS-Research-Critique-Guidelines.docx  (Attached)

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. (10% or Less)

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS

Discussion Questions (DQ)

Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.
Weekly Participation

Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.
APA Format and Writing Quality

Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.
Use of Direct Quotes

I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.
LopesWrite Policy

For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.
Late Policy

The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.
Communication

Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me: Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.