Quantitative Study Appraisal: Findings and Credibility Analysis

This assignment provides a comprehensive appraisal of a quantitative study, focusing on the use of chlorhexidine bathing as an infection prevention strategy. The study, a review of literature, examines the effectiveness of chlorhexidine in preventing healthcare-associated infections and reducing skin contamination. The appraisal evaluates the study's purpose, methodology, sample selection, data collection methods, and findings. Key aspects include assessing the study's credibility, including peer review, data analysis, and control of variables, along with an evaluation of the clinical significance of the findings. The analysis considers the study's conclusions regarding the impact of chlorhexidine in reducing pathogen spread and its recommendations for implementing effective strategies to ensure compliance with protocols. This study is a valuable resource for understanding evidence-based practices in healthcare settings, particularly in infection control.

Appraisal Guide
Findings of a Quantitative Study
APA Formatted Citation: (4 pts.)
Donskey, C. J., & Deshpande, A. (2016). Effect of chlorhexidine bathing in preventing infections
and reducing skin burden and environmental contamination: a review of the literature.
American journal of infection control, 44(5), e17-e21.
Synopsis (16 pts.)
1. What was the purpose of the study (research questions, purposes, and hypotheses)?
- This study is a review on the usage of chlohexadine bathing as an infection
prevention strategy. It examines evidences of how the chlohexadine can be able to
prevent colonization and infection of health care associated pathogens.
2. How was the sample obtained?
- Studies relating to the use of chlohexadine were searched using Medline database
using broad search techniques and recent review articles.
3. What inclusion or exclusion criteria were used?
- This study included studies which had studied on use of chlohexadine as a prevention
strategy on pathogens.
- All studies relating to the topic in the MEDLINE database were included.
- The study excluded all non studies which did not involve the key terminologies used
in chlohexadine use as a prevention mechanism
4. Who from the sample actually participated or contributed data?
- All studies related to the search terminology tha is pertaining chlohexadine drug
administration
5. What methods were used to collect data (e.g., sequence, timing, types of data, and
measures)?
- The study used filter search using terminologies related to the subject line
6. Was an intervention tested?
- No
A. How was the sample size determined?
Reproduced with permission from: Brown, S. J. (2018). Evidence-based nursing: The research-practice connection
(4th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
1

- The article used all studies related to chlohexadine prevention strategies found on
MEDLINE database.
B. Were patients randomly assigned to treatment groups?
- There were no patients in the study
7. What are the main findings of the study? (10 pts.)
- The study concluded that reducing skin carrier had an impact in reducing the spread
of pathogens. The use of chlohexadine bathing is beneficial in removal of pathogens.
Thus the review article found out there is extensive use of chlohexadine use in health
facilities in removal of pathogens.
Credibility (14 pts.) Yes No Not Clear
Is the study published in a source that required peer review? Yes
*Did the data obtained and the analysis conducted answer the
research question? Yes
Were the measuring instruments reliable and valid? Not clear
*Were important extraneous variables and bias controlled? No
*If an intervention was tested, answer the following five
questions:
Were participants randomly assigned to groups and were
the two groups similar at the start (before the
intervention)? No
Were the interventions well defined and consistently
delivered? No
Were the groups treated equally other than the difference
in interventions? Not clear
If no difference was found, was the sample size large
enough to detect a difference if one existed? No
If a difference was found, are you confident it was due to
the intervention? Not clear
Are the findings consistent with findings from other studies? Yes
ARE THE FINDINGS CREDIBLE? All
Clinical Significance (6 pts.)
1. Note any difference in means, r2s, or measures of clinical effects (ABI, NNT, RR, OR)
- None showed since it was a review study
Reproduced with permission from: Brown, S. J. (2018). Evidence-based nursing: The research-practice connection
(4th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
2

Yes No Not
Clear
*Is the target population clearly described? Yes
*Is the frequency, association, or treatment effect impressive
enough for you to be confident that the finding would make a
clinical difference if used as the basis for care?
Yes
All Some No
ARE THE FINDINGS CLINICALLY
SIGNIFICANT?
All
*= Important criteria
Comments
The article reviewed the use of chlohexadine among patients colonized with health care related
contamination and pathogens. This study attest further that there is strong rational of
reduction of burden of pathogens. In order to assess its usage this study reviewed several
studies using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane register of controlled trials database using Ovid
filter in Ovid database. The studies are varied and portray different level of evidence. The
results showed that there is sufficient evidence which support the use of chlohexadine to
control and prevent pathogen contamination. The study thus recommends implementation of
effective strategies to ensure compliance of protocols associated with chlohexadine use.
Reproduced with permission from: Brown, S. J. (2018). Evidence-based nursing: The research-practice connection
(4th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
3