Summary/Critique of the Article
The study’s title is an accurate and straightforward overview of the article and indicates the issue to be addressed. Further, the title presents nurses as the study group and presenteeism as the topic of interest. This article’s title enables the prediction of the content it contains by the readers before even reading the research abstract for a complete overview.
The goals of this article are articulated, and this study’s purpose is to be informed concerning presenteeism and its impact on nurses’ decision-making and coping, and also the arising consequences. The purpose is clearly stated in the introduction section and the abstract, using the term ‘aim’ to represent purpose.
The study’s significance is not stated directly but inferred and described in the article’s background information. The significance identified is that many practical clinical errors and environmental hazards are associated with presenteeism and decrease patient care safety.
There is a close relationship between the statement of the problem and the study’s significance. The problem statement in this study is not easy to identify because it needs to be directly stated, as is the case with the significance of the study. The consequences and the concerns reported from presenteeism are listed within the introduction’s background information. The article explains that when it comes to presenteeism, it is essential to comprehend the nurse’s viewpoint regarding the actions taken to address the issues and what is believed to be the concerns. The author of this article believes that this will result in the identification of effective interventions.
The qualitative research design was used in this research article even though the type of method utilized is not specified. Inference indicates that the phenomenological approach was utilized. The semi-structured interviews were conducted based on the experiences nurses had with presenteeism.
There are no research questions stated explicitly within this study. The problem statement, the purpose, and the significance all revolve around awareness of presenteeism and give a prompt for the research. However, specific questions are still being answered in the study. The research generally focuses on gaining knowledge concerning presenteeism, but no interview questions are stated in the article to guide the study participants.
This study utilized limited types of studies concerning presenteeism. The literature for this review was mostly presented with paraphrased information throughout the introduction section. No gaps or trends from the previous work are discussed in the article. Also, the review utilized a mixture of out-of-date research and current studies. Sixteen of the twenty-five references used in the review were over five years old. While the results within the study were new information obtained from the use of different research methods and not the previously used methods, the background information was an existing work summary.
The study’s theoretical framework is inferred based on the workshop presentation and is appropriate for the research type. The article did not describe the theory or model. The personal experiences and the interviews were noted to give the researcher information beyond the research question. The article leaves the research participants with questions to continue with open discussion instead of limited simple responses.
The methodological process utilized involved approval of the review by the institutional review board. There was no distress, benefits, or harm; the participants were voluntarily interviewed for the study. It was not provided to explain whether the participant was free to quit the study any time they felt uncomfortable discussing the topic or study questions. The article did not provide any information concerning consent. The coding and transcribing were used to maintain the interview data confidentiality. There was a discussion of the confidentiality certificate, which should have been given because of how to protect shared data and maintain participant information. The research did not involve any participants in the vulnerable group. The data collection process accounts for all the participants stated.
The study used a simple research design, but no tradition was identified. The researcher used a set of predetermined questions to interview the participants. Professional coders transcribed the information for the questions used, and also the information was related to presenteeism. Even though the design utilized information from previous studies done by the same researcher, it appeared to have been decided before the occurrence of any analysis. The utilized design is appropriate for the presenteeism topic and did not require fieldwork outside the study’s preplanned interviews.
Obtaining the sample from two settings makes it inappropriate to generalize the results. The article must explain why the two health facilities were selected for study participation. Only the inclusion criteria are explained in this study, but the selection process of the participants is not stated.
The data collection methods utilized were anonymous demographic surveys and structured interviews. The researcher utilized self-reports to capture the phenomenon of the study. The research did not achieve triangulation despite using two methods to collect data. To formulate a sample population and, in turn, keep participants anonymous, interviews were used in congruent with demographic information. It is not known if the researcher asked the questions within each interview in the same manner because the questions’ descriptions still need to be done. Complete responses were obtained from the interviewees, the researcher declared no bias, and the relationship between the study purpose and the statements is appropriate. The researcher and transcripts performed interviews ranging from ten to forty-nine minutes and were formulated from recordings for information analysis. The study used a conventional content analysis method to analyze the collected transcripts to describe presenteeism in the healthcare system. Autonomy was provided to all the participants by de-identifying all the transcripts.
The data was organized using conventional content analysis, which seems appropriate for the collected data type. The article explains that no metaphors for communicating the analysis and data bias were noted. Research results were presented in categories relaying the workplace challenges of presenteeism, the methods to control the challenges, and the consequences. The five categories from the interview questions explored were the basis of the summary of the findings. The categories included presenteeism, consequences, symptoms and awareness of presenteeism, decision-making regarding presenteeism, and coping with presenteeism on and off shifts. Results showed that most of the study participants had experienced presenteeism within the data collection month, creating an authentic and proactive study sample. The article further indicates that since the collected data depended on experiences and opinions, no arguments were made to disagree or agree with the results.
Impact of the Information on Nonsing Practice
Presenteeism is an essential topic in nursing. The information obtained from this study can impact nursing practice positively because it can be utilized to make interventions for the concerns pointed out. The information impacts nursing practice in that it assists in identifying the possible or expected presenteeism consequences (Lima & Buarque, 2019). Further, the information provides understanding and knowledge concerning the factors that result in presenteeism. The other impact of this information on the nursing practice is that it points out ways of coping with presenteeism while on or off shift. The information also provides the symptoms of presenteeism, which is essential to nursing practice as it eases the identification of this type of situation (Ruhle et al., 2020). Also, the information this article gives impacts nursing practice in that it fosters accuracy in decision-making concerning presenteeism (Keramat et al.,2020). The information assists healthcare practice because it assists in understanding the need for changing the leave policies to reduce fatigue and improve mental health outcomes.
References
Keramat, S. A., Alam, K., Gow, J., & Biddle, S. J. (2020). A longitudinal exploration of the relationship between obesity and long-term health conditions with presenteeism in Australian workplaces, 2006-2018. PLoS One, 15(8), e0238260. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0238260
Lima, R. B., & Buarque, A. (2019). Oral health in the context of prevention of absenteeism and presenteeism in the workplace. Revista Brasileira de Medicina Do Trabalho, 17(4), 594.
https://doi.org/10.5327%2FZ1679443520190397
Rainbow, J. G., Dudding, K. M., & Bethel, C. (2021). A qualitative study describing nurses’ experiences with presenteeism. JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration, 51(3), 135–140. https://doi.org/ 10.1097/NNA.0000000000000984
Ruhle, S. A., Breitsohl, H., Aboagye, E., Baba, V., Biron, C., Correia Leal, C., … & Yang, T. (2020). “To work, or not to work, that is the question”–Recent trends and avenues for research on presenteeism. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 29(3), 344-363. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2019.1704734
write