Abstract
This research attempts to verify psychosocial resistance, coping habits, and social helplessness among healthcare employees during the COVID-19 era by applying a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies. This study summarizes the most common findings from several trials that highlight the general tendencies and patterns evident across the literature. Reviewing the factors influencing health workers’ well-being, such as their ability to handle stress and crisis, access social support networks, and demonstrate psychological resilience, is the crucial issue that is affected. The limitations of the included studies, variations in used methodologies, and the likelihood that some studies have biases are also acknowledged. However, such a review reveals only the limitations of studying the situation related to the pandemic healthcare workers’ experiences and, thus, the need for caring for their mental health. It provides impactful suggestions to increase the welfare of healthcare staff members during public health crises. The paper contributes to the knowledge needed to implement interventions and policies.
Keywords: Qualitative, Quantitative, COVID-19 pandemic, Healthcare workers, Social support, coping behaviors, Psychological resilience
Assignment 2
The pandemic of COVID-19 brought enormous problems for healthcare professionals on the front line. In familiarizing oneself with psychological resilience, coping mechanisms and social support of the healthcare workers become crucial. This study systematically reviews both quantitative and qualitative studies on these topics, which are vitally important during the pandemic.
Qualitative Research
Definition
Qualitative research is a methodological method that is used to explore and understand social phenomena from the points of view of the individuals concerned with the topic. It is through the collection and analysis of qualitative data, which are not numbers related, such as words, pictures, or observations, that one can uncover the meanings, patterns, and themes.
Characteristics and Nursing Issues
Qualitative research can be typically realized through one’s subjective experience in the context and comprehensive understanding of the issue. Certain issues in nursing fit qualitative research, such as patient experiences, coping strategies, healthcare workers’ points of view, and organizational dynamics found in medical facilities.
Comparison of Methodologies
The three most frequent qualitative methodologies are phenomenology, grounded theory, and ethnography. Phenomenology focuses on individuals’ experiences and perceptions and attempts to understand and reveal one’s experience in certain phenomena. Grounded Theory: Try to develop theories that are based on empirical data through systematic coding and constant comparisons of data. Ethnography: Try to understand the culture of a specific group or community by paying attention and describing their social interactions. It includes case studies of a particular cultural context in order to help people grasp social phenomena.
Strengths and Weaknesses
The strengths of qualitative research are important for defining nursing practices as they can give a more detailed and complex picture of certain phenomena, help the understanding of the perspectives of patients, and point the direction for patient-centered intervention development. On the other hand, qualitative research may be affected by bias, be unable to be generalized, and usually require a large amount of time and resources to collect and analyze data. By using qualitative research methods, researchers can explore the hidden data in detail and delve into specialist contexts. It gives a scope of a variety of data collection mechanisms. As research methods are psychological, any findings may lack generalization, and interpretations can be subjective.
Research Design
The study by Chen et al. on the quarantine experience of COVID-19 close contacts adopted the qualitative descriptive design. Its goal was to uncover the subjective experiences and views of those placed in quarantine. A study conducted by Chen et al. (2020) applied a qualitative descriptive design to examine the quarantine experiences of people who were in close contact with COVID-19 patients in China. This design was adequate because it aimed at providing detailed information, while the in-depth theories and interpretations were left to the interpretations of the readers.
Study Components
Sampling
The sampling process likely utilized purposive sampling of near contacts of COVID-19 patients to ensure the diversity of the experiences being studied. Recruitment methods might have included contacting the individuals directly inside healthcare facilities or community organizations. These strategies were effectively chosen since they tackled people who were affected directly by the study’s topic. Participants were sampled in a manner that saw them representatives from different regions in China.
Data Collection
Data collection might have included running the interviews in semi-structured form, which would have given participants the chance to express themselves freely. The method was suitable because it enabled an understanding of participants’ viewpoints from an in-depth perspective. Data analysis probably consisted of thematic analysis, which involves the investigation and identification of emerging patterns as well as their interpretation from the transcribed interviews. Semi-structured interviews were held via online platforms.
Analysis
The thematic analysis was selected as the methodological approach, with a view to providing a rigorous analysis of the data set, in which the smart patterns and themes summarized in the data set were unraveled step by step.
Rigor
The validity of qualitative research is assessed using four metrics, including credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. Credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability were features to protect trustworthiness.
Findings and Limitations
The findings disclosed that the psychological influence, ways of coping, and social aid during isolation are some core issues. Restrictions included the possibility of individual biases when choosing participants and the subjective nature of self-aimed experiences.
Purpose
The focus of this study was to examine how quarantines of the close contacts of patients with COVID-19 are experienced in China. The study team had a qualitative descriptive design in place and conducted semi-structured interviews with close contacts to collect rich, qualitative data. To investigate the quarantine of the close contacts of COVID-19 patients in China, which is one of the countries most profoundly affected by the virus.
Study Designs and Appropriateness
Chen et al. (2020) used a qualitative descriptive approach that was suitable for assessing the phenomenon of quarantine measures through the perceptions and testimonies of quarantined people. This structure facilitates plummeting almost into the matter itself. However, contrary to this, Ashley et al. (2021) used a qualitative approach, which would be more effective in representing the psychological condition of the nurses working in primary health care services during the pandemic period.
Ethical Issues and Addressing Them
In the same ethical dilemma in both studies, the application of this can be done through informed consent, confidentiality, and the least adverse impact on participants. Although the sources referred to in the given study do not directly elaborate on how exactly these challenges were tackled, they certainly reasonably highlight the problems. The ethical issues involved in the conduct of this study may include ensuring those involved fully understand what they have enrolled into, privacy and keeping the information confidential, and also ensuring that participants are protected psychologically during the process of data collection. The difficulties with such trials should have been indicated in the study. The researchers should have accommodated these problems by obtaining informed consent, protecting participants’ confidentiality, and offering distress support during the interviews.
Sampling Methods and Recruitment Strategies
Chen et al. (2020) employed purposive sampling to identify a group of participants who had undergone quarantine because they were close to COVID-19 patients. Ashley and colleagues (2021) applied the convenience sampling technique by choosing healthcare nurses who were readily available and willing to participate. Although the goal of purposive sampling is to reflect the target experience, convenience sampling might lead to biases through the chance option of participants.
Appropriateness of Sampling and Recruitment
They highlighted the homogeneity of the sampling methods used in the two studies and their respective aims. Chen et al. (2020) conducted interviews among Chinese citizens directly experiencing quarantine as opposed to Ashley et al. (2021), who sampled primary healthcare nurses more likely to illuminate their psychological state during the pandemic.
Data Collection Methods
Chen et al. (2020) recruited researched participants by interviewing those using semi-structured interviews, which allowed their life experiences to be expressed in their own words. The focus group was one of the best strategies used by Ashley et al. (2021) as it promoted interaction among the participants, enabling them to share and foster their common experiences and perspectives.
Appropriateness of Data Collection Methods
Both studies’ data collections were satisfactory in that they enabled the acquisition of thick qualitative data that answered the respective study research questions. Through the interviews and the focus groups, the people can give opinions regarding the subject of the study.
Data Analysis Methods
In contrast, Chen and colleagues (2020) employed thematic analysis as a qualitative research approach. This approach aims to identify emergent themes and patterns from the participants’ narratives. A study was carried out by Ashley and his research team based on content analysis to first sort and then further interpret the generalizations and insights from the focus group discussions through the use of systematic approaches.
Appropriateness of Data Analysis Methods
As for the studies, the thematic and content analysis process was the most suitable for qualitative data analysis methods for both studies. Through the rounds of the interview, the researchers were able to identify commonalities among the participants, point out the difference among the participants and also bring out themes that were individually distinct from the group.
Rigor Criteria for Qualitative Projects
Assessing the validity of qualitative projects is founded on some settings for instance credibility, generalizability, reliability, and confirmability.
Rigor Evaluation
Credibility was certified using good data achievement and analysis processes. Transferability was considered in the domains of description of the subjects and the situations to which the readers could refer in their investigations. The reliability of the whole study overall was greatly elevated by detailed documentation of the research processes, consequently achieving our objective of making scientific work more transparent. An easy and ordered record of both the decisions and interpretations provided the reliability of the research. The conclusions were trustworthy.
Study Findings and Limitations
As stated by Chen et al. (2020), the relatives of the patients diagnosed with the virus experience a number of negative feelings during quarantine, such as social and psychological issues. Limitations comprised people’s memory recall and the study’s narrow focus on one region in China (Ashley et al., 2021). According to Ashley et al. (2021), it is revealed that the safety and well-being of the nursing staff in primary healthcare centers depend on the level of organizational support and coping strategies. One of the drawbacks that need to be accounted for in the study is the possibility of social desirability bias, and secondly, its data was self-reported.
Trustworthiness and Applicability
The study, considering its limitations, offers useful information about quarantine experience, in connection with which can be created a service in order to cope with the psychological needs that arise as a result of the pandemics, which have an impact on nursing practice in general (Chen et al., 2020). What the two studies had in common was to show reliability with the help of meticulous techniques and solid reporting standards. On the other hand, the findings may be challenged by factors like sample bias and contexts. While interpreting these findings, potential biases and contexts like socio-economic conditions should be considered. These studies are useful instruments to generate knowledge on how quarantine impacted the lives of people who suffered the direct consequences of the measures and healthcare professionals during the global health crisis. Nurses can utilize this building data from the model to form useful interventions geared towards helping those individuals and healthcare professionals manage public health crises.
Quantitative Research
Definition
A qualitative investigation is the evidence-based study of phenomena that are considered through the use of numbers and statistical analysis. It is nothing but the numerical description of the relationship between variables and the verification of the never-ending hypothesis. The features of quantitative research include its structure, the use of standardized measurement tools, the statistics, and the focus on objectivity and generalizing that allows it to encompass a variety of approaches. It usually comes with a large enough sample size to ensure statistical power as it includes part of the methods, such as self-administered questionnaires, experiments, and observational studies. Quantitative research is the system of empirical investigation of phenomena that uses numerical data and statistical software to analyze, test hypotheses, and discover established relations between the different aspects of the phenomenon.
Characteristics and Nursing Issues
Quantitative research commonly involves collecting a large amount of numerical data, carrying out a statistical study, and ensuring the generalizability of the results. Nursing topics for quantitative research may include treatment effectiveness, patient outcomes, healthcare inequity, and trends in epidemiology (Labrague, 2021). There are a few issues that fall into the category of quantitative research design, such as the efficiency of interventions, healthcare outcomes, healthcare disparities, and healthcare workers’ experiences during crises like the COVID-19 pandemic.
Observational vs. Interventional Research Designs
Observational research observes and analyzes phenomena as they occur naturally without intervention, whereas interventional research involves the deliberate manipulation of variables.
Experimental vs. Quasi-experimental Designs
The experimental designs stipulate the random allocation of participants into control and experimental groups with the intention of causal inference. Quasi-experimental designs do not involve Randomization but aim to identify cause and effect mechanisms.
Inferential vs. Descriptive Statistics
Inferential statistics are used to make inferences about populations based on sample data, while descriptive statistics summarize and describe the characteristics of a dataset.
Application of Research Design
Labrague’s study on psychological resilience was conducted through a systematic review of quantitative studies to synthesize the evidence on healthcare workers’ resilience, coping behavior, and social support during the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors used the statistical methodology, where they statistically analyzed data by combining multiple studies to make generalizations and recognize tendencies.
Critique of Quantitative Research: The Study
Purpose and Design
One of the purposes of the study is to provide a systematic review of quantitative research studies on psychological resilience, coping mechanisms, and social support among health workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The design was based on a systematic review of the available literature. Labrague (2021) conducted a meta-analysis to examine quantitative research about psychological resilience, coping behaviors, and social support among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The design embodies the systematic review.
Blinding and Randomization
Blinding is considered the act of keeping the information about group allocation from participants or researchers to eliminate personal bias. Randomization is simply that of randomly assigning the participants into groups to ensure an equal distribution of characteristics. This study was not masked and random, as it was a review of the existing literature.
Ethical Issues
Ethical concerns like obtaining informed consent and maintaining confidentiality of participants’ data may come up in the process of human subject studies. Systematic reviews are concerned with ethics, not with the welfare of the participants but with the integrity of data collection and analysis.
Sampling
The method of sampling involved selecting relevant quantitative data through a systematic literature review search. As the study did not cover any participant recruitment, the recruitment strategy was not relevant.
Sample size in a systematic review
Sample size in a systematic review is determined based on the inclusion criteria, and the aim is to cover the existing literature on the topic comprehensively.
Data Collection
Data were collected through a careful search of databases res, resulting in all the pertinent quantitative research studies. In relation to this, the data collection tool could have been a better fit as the study relied primarily on secondary data and did not involve the direct collection of the evidence.
Validity and Reliability
Validity means the accuracy and appropriateness with which a measurement is supposed to be measured, while reliability is the consistency in the obtained results. This research dealt with validity and reliability through a systematic review procedure that implied stricter inclusion criteria and data extraction rules to provide the information included in the studies with the required quality and reliability.
Data Analysis
Data were analyzed systematically, including merging and interpreting the findings from all selected studies by the review process. The types of statistics used when conducting the synthesis were determined by the analyses done in the individual studies that were included in the review.
Findings and Limitations
The research showed several factors pertaining to psychological resilience and coping behavior as well as social support that were particular to the healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Limitations are that there might be variation in the methodologies applied in the studies, and there might be bias in the included studies.
Trustworthiness and Applicability
The credibility of the study is enforced by the systematic review procedure, which boosts transparency and rigor. On the other hand, the generalizability of the conclusions can be compromised by the differences in research designs and contexts across the included studies. Statistical significance means the likelihood of the obtained result being caused by chance. In this case, values indicate the possibility of obtaining this result, given that the null hypothesis is true. The statistical significance tests used in this study were not specified, as this review included numerous studies that used a variety of different statistical tests.
In conclusion, both qualitative and quantitative methods are significant in nursing practice; these two types of methods differ when it comes to exposing the intricate process of healthcare issues. Qualitative research as a method grants access to the subjective sphere of human experience, and quantitative research provides a set of rules and tools for a systemic approach plus statistical validation. The above study concludes that every technique is good at something. However, it has its limitations, and the selection of the appropriate method requires that the research questions and objectives define their application.
References
Ashley, C., James, S., Williams, A., Calma, K., Mcinnes, S., Mursa, R., & Halcomb, E. (2021). The psychological well‐being of primary healthcare nurses during COVID‐19: A qualitative study. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 77(9), 3820–3828. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.14937
Chen, D., Song, F., Tang, L., Zhang, H., Shao, J., Qiu, R., & Ye, Z. (2020). Quarantine experience of close contacts of COVID-19 patients in China: A qualitative descriptive study. General hospital psychiatry, pp. 66, 81–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2020.07.006
Labrague, L. J. (2021). Psychological resilience, coping behaviors, and social support among health care workers during the COVID‐19 pandemic: A systematic review of quantitative studies. Journal of Nursing Management, 29(7), 1893-1905. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13336
write