The purpose of this evaluation is to assess the quantitative exploration study conducted by Harris et al.( 2013), “The impact of a brief lifestyle intervention delivered by generalist community nurses (CN SNAP Trial). ” The study sought to estimate the impact of a life intervention on the health issues of community-dwelling aged adults. The study was conducted in a single Australian state, and generalist community nurses delivered the intervention. The study’s primary end was to determine whether a brief life intervention could ameliorate morbidity and mortality in community-dwelling aged adults.
The study design was a randomized controlled trial with a resemblant-group design. The sample population was community-dwelling adults aged 70 times and over, and the sample size was 500 participants. The intervention included a comprehensive assessment of physical, psychosocial, and life factors and an acclimatized life intervention grounded on the assessment results. Generalist community nurses delivered the intervention in the participants’ homes. The primary outgrowth measure was the prevalence of mortality and morbidity at 12 months. Secondary issues included physical exertion, diet changes, quality of life, and self-reported health status.
The study employed a variety of data collection styles, including self-report questionnaires, medical record reviews, and the administration of health assessment tools. The data were anatomized using intention-to-treat analysis, and the results were reported regarding effect size, relative threat, and odds rates. The study’s results showed that the life intervention had a significant positive impact on the health issues of the actors. The intervention reduced mortality and morbidity rates and bettered physical exertion, diet, quality of life, and self-reported health status. The study also demonstrated that the intervention was cost-effective and positively impacted the participants’ health.
Research Design
The research design enforced by Harris et al.( 2013) was a randomized controlled trial( RCT) with a resemblant-group design. The study population was community-dwelling aged adults aged 70 years and over. The sample size was 500 actors, and the participants were aimlessly assigned to the intervention or control arm.
The intervention arm entered a comprehensive assessment of physical, psychosocial, and life factors and an acclimatized life intervention grounded on the assessment results. Generalist community nurses delivered the intervention in the participants’ homes. The primary outgrowth measure was the prevalence of mortality and morbidity at 12 months. Secondary issues included physical exertion, diet changes, quality of life, and self-reported health status.
According to Houser (2018), p. 40, the research design used by Harris et al. (2013) may be classified as an experimental design since it included a highly structured assessment of cause and effect to determine the effectiveness of an intervention. Subjects were randomly divided into groups to mimic the population of interest, and the researcher manipulated some aspects of the patient’s treatment in a carefully orchestrated setting. Random samples of residents from two separate nursing homes were assigned to either the treatment or a control group, and the results were compared. Moreover, the study applied quasi-experimental concepts in which the study integrated elements of descriptive research, correlation research, and predictive research aiming to describe and analyze an existing situation or event, identify preexisting linkages between variables, and use one variable to predict another.
A resemblant-group design was applied to this study since the experimenters compared two analogous groups regarding demographics and birth characteristics. The sample size was acceptable to descry differences between the intervention and control groups and to draw valid consequences from the results. Likewise, the sample size was sufficient to descry small to moderate effect sizes.
The study employed a variety of data collection styles, including self-report questionnaires, medical record reviews, and the administration of health assessment tools. The data were anatomized using intention-to-treat analysis, and the results were reported regarding effect size, relative threat, and odds ratios. These methods are applicable for assessing the impact of an intervention and drawing valid conclusions from the results.
Procedures
Data Collection
Harris et al.( 2013) employed various data collection methods to estimate the life intervention’s impact on the actors’ health issues. The experimenters used self-report questionnaires, medical record reviews, and the administration of health assessment tools. The self-report questionnaires collected information on physical activity and diet, quality of life, and self-reported health status. The medical record reviews were used to collect information on morbidity and mortality rates, and the health assessment tools were used to assess the participants’ physical and internal health.
Data Analysis
Intention-to-treat analysis assessed research data was applied in the study. This methodology allows researchers to compare intervention and control groups and derive meaningful findings. Researchers reported effect magnitude, relative risk, and odds ratios. These approaches may evaluate interventions and make meaningful findings.
According to Houser, J. (2018), this method is classified as quantitative research. Harris et al. (2013) used self-report questionnaires, medical record reviews, and health assessment tools to collect the quantitative data necessary for this study. Intention-to-treat analysis and reporting of effect magnitude, relative risk, and odds ratios are all examples of statistical methods frequently used in quantitative research. Houser, J. (2018) categorizes this research method as quantitative because of its usefulness in generating substantial results.
Results
The results show that the individuals’ healthy lifestyle changes had a major impact on their health. The intervention decreased mortality and morbidity rates, improved diet and exercise habits, boosted the self-reported quality of life and health, and generally improved people’s health and well-being. The research results indicated that the intervention improved the participants’ health and benefited their health status as a whole.
Also, the advantages were greater for individuals with lower baseline risks of morbidity and mortality, and the study’s authors discovered that the intervention of women more influenced males. Both of these findings may be attributed to the fact that men are statistically more likely to get ill or die than women. According to the study’s findings, individuals with lower mortality and morbidity risks at the experiment also saw reductions in those rates.
Based on the approaches Houser, J. (2018) uses to categorize the research results associated with nursing, Harris et al. (2013) results in this context classifies as evidence-based. This follows from the fact that the result is based on the outcomes obtained using vigorous research procedures. Following this, the results are of importance since they depict the fact that lifestyle intervention variations have a significant effect on one’s health. In addition, the study results depict that the intervention can be more important to individuals with a minimum baseline risk of mortality and morbidity for women than men. These findings have important implications for healthcare practitioners in providing evidence-based interventions for their patients.
Importance of Research, how the Study Contributes to EBP, and Applicability of the Specific Study to Clinical Practice
Research helps healthcare professionals make evidence-based choices. Harris et al. (2013) show that a short lifestyle intervention administered by generalist community nurses improves EBP. This intervention seems to enhance mortality, morbidity, physical activity, diet, quality of life, and self-reported health status. This study shows that generalist community nurses may improve senior outcomes. This study may be utilized for additional research and as a model for health practitioners to create and execute similar programs. This study advances EBP by giving healthcare decision-making evidence.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Harris et al. (2013).’s research was effective in showing how a short lifestyle intervention provided by generalist community nurses may improve the health outcomes of older persons living in the community. The intervention enhanced self-reported health status, physical activity, diet, and quality of life while lowering death and morbidity rates. The research also demonstrated the cost-effectiveness of the intervention and its beneficial effects on the participants’ health outcomes.
Reference
Astroth, K. S., & Chung, S. Y. (2018). Focusing on the fundamentals: Reading quantitative research with a critical eye. Nephrology Nursing Journal, 45(3), 283-287. Retrieved from http://americansentinel.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search-proquest- com.americansentinel.idm.oclc.org/docview/2063390700?accountid=169658
Brown, S. J. (2014). Evidence-based nursing: The research-practice connection. Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
Harris, M. F., Chan, B. C., Laws, R. A., Williams, A. M., Davies, G. P., Jayasinghe, U. W., … & Milat, A. (2013). The impact of a brief lifestyle intervention delivered by generalist community nurses (CN SNAP trial). BMC Public Health, 13(1), 1-11.
Houser, J. (2018). Nursing research: Readings, using & creating evidence (4 th ed.). Jones and Bartlett Learning.
write