Medication errors are one of the most preventable adverse events in healthcare, yet they continue to affect patient safety and quality of care. Informed decision-making as to causes and solutions can be possible through designated research (Gough, 2021). When judging hospital in-hospital errors, one should pay critical attention to the soundness of the methodology, sample size, representativeness, strength of data analysis, validity of the measures, and objectivity, among others. Determining what is evidence and what is just plain opinion on this subject is challenging. However, when scientists perform rigorous studies, they often include a control group, control for other factors that might affect the results, have a good sample size representative or large patient sample, use validated measurement tools, and interpret the results clearly. Developing and using evidence-based interventions for the assessment of existing high-yield risk factors, evidence-based practice effective prevention procedures, and significant effects of hospital medication errors on patients, finance, and health care units are essential to improve patient safety.
Interview
An all-encompassing interview was used to get profound assurance from a nursing scholar who would identify strategies to find methodologically advanced research studies that explicitly address the issue of medication errors occurring in hospital surgical units. It is necessary to be precise while using keywords and search terms to get the literature that is research-linked (Herrström et al., 2020). She stated that using those keywords to run a search would help in yielding much more effective results. For the investigation of medication mistakes occurrence in an operating unit involving patients in a hospital setting, phrases to be used in search like medication errors, drug failure, hospital, surgery, operating room or OR could be employed through the use of and, or, and not phrases. Specializes in this through the use of electronic databases that efficiently track down peer-reviewed journal articles and journals. Databases such as CINAHL, PubMed, and Nursing Reference Center Plus were the standouts because of their adequate nursing content and allied health content. The expert confirmed it. The scholar suggested the PICO framework as a valuable method of went on to say that the questions should be broken down into their essential parts, Ie patient problem, intervention, comparison groups, and outcomes of interest. Establishing PICO elements to keyword research acts as a clarifier of more relatable studies.
What is more, another essential skill related to writing a research paper is the correct referencing of the use of sources. The nursing scholar advised respecting style manual specifications, which determine details of formatting of any given writing paper or project. For example, the body of an APA-style paper comprises specific rules about in-text citations, reference pages, and bibliography. Referencing correctly as well as to lend work credibility, is a must because it prevents means of plagiarism and also makes sourcing easy for readers (Herrström et al., 2020). Useful citation management tools like EndNote and RefWorks were also discussed. Lastly, the scholar reflected on how appraising the quality and applicability of research studies is critical before applying findings to clinical practice. She debated using guides and checklists to systematically assess parameters like the validity of the methodology, limitations, recency, and potential biases (Tomotaki et al., 2023). This information filters which studies offer factual information versus unsupported opinions or claims. Appraisal skills empower nurses to incorporate solid evidence into their decision-making.
Locating Sources
The first step in locating sources is to formulate a straightforward research question. Using the PICOT format to frame the problem, specifying the population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and time frame. For example, suppose the research aims to study the impact of staffing levels on medication errors. The PICOT question might be: “In the surgical unit, how do medication errors in three months compare when the nurse-to-patient ratio is 1:6 versus 1:8?” Finally, the researcher has to talk about the definition of the research question and the need for the relevant keywords or phrases to play the role of database searches. Boolean operators such as “AND,” “OR,” and “NOT” should be applied to connect and shape search terms so that topically relevant texts are selected (Herrström et al., 2020). For instance, one could query by narrowing such search phrases as “medication errors AND staffing levels AND surgical unit” or “nurse-to-patient ratio AND medication errors.”
Using four primary databases: Nursing reference centres, for example, CINAHL, Nursing Reference Center Plus, LIRN, and ProQuest. This gives students the opportunity to use databases that have been paid for by the library and reviewed by experts with content that is focused on nursing and healthcare, which makes it more likely to find relevant sources (Oermann et al., 2020). After all of the results are combined, the sources’ credibility needs to be reviewed by employing the “CRAAP” (currency, relevance, authority, accuracy, and purpose) guideline. Preferences towards recently published, at least five years ago publications so the information is as relevant and current as it could be in consideration of the problem (Gough, 2021). Finally, ascertain the authors’ standing and competence and the thoroughness and intent of the research to conclude whether the literature may be used.
The search will highlight journals and research papers on medication errors, staffing levels, and patient safety in surgical rooms. However, it is essential to assess and consider every source, be careful to decide if each resource fits with the research question and the hospital background in particular. Only the rare subset of those initial search outcomes is regarded to be acceptable. It is thus added to the research because of their currency, relevancy, accuracy, and trustworthiness, as well as their ability to serve a particular objective (Herrström et al., 2020). This process is not the easiest one, good engagement of the critical sense and careful examination of the sources are inevitable, as otherwise the accuracy and trustworthiness of the research results will be in danger. However, it is also indispensable to remain open to new sources and information during the search because it is possible that some vital and valuable sources will not be discovered at this stage (Tamotaki et al., 2023). Thus, continuous literature review along with expert consultation and attending appropriate conferences or workshops will contribute to formulating additional sources of information that could make this research more credible and robust in terms of its conclusions.
Electronic databases
In case of studying drug mistakes in a surgery ward in a hospital, I should choose the CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) database among those provided and CINAHL, Nursing Reference Center Plus, LIRN, and ProQuest. CINAHL is a great resource that is uniquely made for searching nursing literature as well as other related health topics. It is, therefore the best database tool to use for a nursing study that concentrates on issues related to a hospital and its patients (Oermann et al., 2022). Unlike other databases, CINAHL contains a highly focused and directed set of refereed articles, research reports and publications, which are directly suitable for nurses and health care professionals. With the aid of this specialized database, researchers can free all available authoritative information that is linked to the study on medication errors in a particular surgical unit by checking on the people who used to access these objects before. The researches can utilize such database’s unique content in order to build a solid foundation of evidence to support the research objectives.
Using keyword searches, such as “medication errors,” “surgical unit,” “hospital,” and “patient safety,” Boolean operators like an “AND” and “OR” are used to construct more relevant search queries that will bring up more relevant results. The sentences are better for humans, such as “(medication errors OR patient safety) AND surgical unit”. These show that you only search out the most recent content. Moreover the use of phrases such as “nursing practices”, “medication administration”, “risk factors”, and “prevention strategies” will also add meaning within the search. Jointly (OR variation is), these components can be incorporated use, like “medication errors AND surgical unit AND risk factors” or “medication errors AND hospital AND prevention strategies”, which are (geared towards OR aimed at) selecting only those sources that will give us specific and specialized results. In addition, incorporating filters and limiters offered by the CINAHL database within the search process also contributes to the effectiveness (Oermann et al., 2020). Applying criteria such as publication date and peer-reviewed status ensures that the results include current and reliable sources, optimizes the search, and provides a solid foundation for the study’s research.
Strengths and Weaknesses
The primary features of resources that randomly come from the named electronic databases are that such sources were first inspected and approved by experts before publication. It consequently contributes to the fact that the research targets are clearly defined, the methods used are appropriate, the chances of bias are minimized, and data support the work. It is of specific importance that the research questions are strictly restricted to the target population, intervention and the outcomes of interest, which have to be clearly demarcated. The studies would use proper randomization techniques for selecting participants, would be separate from any matters not to be investigated in the studies and would use statistical tests of the high degree of significance between the data and conclusions (Gough, 2021). The scientific standards that these resources meet are, therefore the source of the credibility which can help officials to make their choices with precise knowledge.
However, it takes, from the advantages, some of the vulnerable points as well. Compared to human experts who write in layperson’s terms or journalists who recap news for a wider audience, the research reported by the AI may be limited to only field-specific topics that do not have widespread applicability (Tomotaki et al., 2023). Besides, complex publication criteria could also result in publication bias in which studies with positive and significant findings stand a high chance of being published. At the same time, those without or with unimpressive outcomes are hard to get published. Specific disciplines would not just limit the aspect of author diversity but also include less diverse research participant samples, which in some other cases may narrow the probability that the findings can be generalized. Furthermore, it tends to exclude the cutting-edge findings that may be still in the process of being published and only reach part of the publishing process. Save and accept; although the hardness of verification could mitigate these issues, still a critical perspective should be opened.
Adequacy
The resources to be regarded as enough adequate for research on the surgical unit error, such that, it will be advanced at the appropriate time. The sources come from accurate academic databases that have stringent information verification methodologies to ensure that they are valid before they are accepted. This is the reason why the research design, methods, analysis and reporting are checked scrupulously to match the adherence to quality and validity measures in the medical sciences (Duff et al., 2020). For example, the research would delineate empirically the patient groups, the surgeries performed and the outcome variables, concerned with medical errors. Quantifying subjects with equal risk distribution and proper sample size calculations are two strategies to narrow the scope of the research. The studies, in particular, offer detailed protocols for data collection that are designed to limit biases without compromising the mathematical significance of medical error as a substantial predictor of patient health deterioration.
Actually, this gives researchers the opportunity to compel at their fingertips the resources that are exclusively helpful to address their research question. They enable people to get to those publications published in the last five years, specifically about surgery-related medical errors. Any studies not suitable or being out of date are excluded. It will render the production of sources with the most recent, the most relevant studies that explain the phenomenon of interest (Herrström et al., 2020). Discriminating yet delicate selection and filtration are essential parts of the approach, bolstering the chances of getting enough relevant resources that will genuinely reflect the target purpose.
Conclusion
In order to apply evidence-based nursing, the process of discovering and evaluating research is the most vital part. First, a proper research methodology — that is, control groups and measurement tools backed up by research — maximizes the authenticity of results. Finally, making smart use of different keywords and looking only in databases such as CINAHL there is a better chance of getting what is needed. Lastly, relatively recent sources, pertinent, reliable(authority), accurate(accuracy), and rooted in explicit intentions are ascertained (Herrström et al, 2020). Therefore, they will be used in the decision-making processes. Through the process of synthesizing top-notch evidence, healthcare providers can come up with reliable strategies of prophylactic measures and the negative consequences of medical errors on the quality of life and the healthcare systems. Hence, ever-lasting dedication in researching and assessing research will be a focused need for dominating the quality improvements in the clinical practices as well as in patients healthcare.
References
Duff, J., Cullen, L., Hanrahan, K., & Steelman, V. M. (2020). Determinants of an evidence-based practice environment: an interpretive description. Implementation Science Communications, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-020-00070-0
Gough, D. (2021). Appraising evidence claims. Review of Research in Education, 45(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732×20985072
Herrström, K., Larsson, S., Einberg, E., Nilsson, M., Blomqvist, K., & Garmy, P. (2020). <p>Assessment of Search Strategies in Literature-Review-Based Candidate Theses Within a Nursing Program</p> Advances in Medical Education and Practice, Volume 11, 71–77. https://doi.org/10.2147/amep.s227547
Oermann, M. H., Wrigley, J., Nicoll, L. H., Ledbetter, L., Carter‐Templeton, H., & Edie, A. H. (2020). Integrity of databases for literature searches in nursing. Advances in Nursing Science, 44(2), 102–110. https://doi.org/10.1097/ans.0000000000000349
Tomotaki, A., Sakai, I., Fukahori, H., Tsuda, Y., & Okumura‐Hiroshige, A. (2023). Factors affecting the critical appraisal of research articles in Evidence‐Based practices by advanced practice nurses: A descriptive qualitative study. Nursing Open, 10(6), 3719–3727. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.1628
write