Palle Larsen and Preben Pedersen’s quasi-experimental study entitled The Effectiveness of Individual Rehabilitation on Health Status in Patient with Hearth Failure must go through a validity and relevance test to determine its value and implications in the development of health care intervention strategies aimed at patients suffering from heart failure or HF. Therefore, it is important to evaluate Larsen and Pedersen’s quasi-experimental study based on clarity, consistency, reliability, and overall validity.
Clarity of Purpose
The authors were able to achieve clarity of purpose by clearly expressing the study’s purpose and the problem they wanted to address. It was made clear in the first few pages of the article that the research team wanted to determine the effectiveness of individually prepared rehabilitation plans on the health status of HF patients (Larsen & Pedersen, 2016). Clarity was achieved when the research team stated two types of rehabilitation procedures.
Relevance: Review of Literature
Relevance in terms of the review of related literature was achieved by presenting insights and ideas linked to the nature of heart diseases, and the importance of long-term rehabilitation care strategies. The literature review provides critical insights into the limitation of current rehabilitation strategies based on the outpatient framework. Furthermore, the team’s review of the literature highlighted the positive outcome in terms of health recovery when the treatment protocol includes HF patients’ participation.
Consistency of the Research Methodology
Consistency in terms of implementation of the research methodology was achieved when the research team ensured the respondents’ separation in accordance with the control and intervention groups. The said respondents remained with their original groupings throughout the said experiment. They complied with the test schedules from the initial phase until the final period. Thus, there was no crossing over from one group to the next.
Appropriate Study Samples
The appropriateness of the study sample was demonstrated in the care that was taken to ensure compliance with ethical standards that dictated the selection process. For example, it was critical to secure the respondents’ permission before their names were included in the study sample document. Furthermore, the research team made sure that the participants required phase 3 rehabilitation for HF patients.
Clarity of Purpose: Manipulation of the Independent Variable
The proponents of the study succeeded in manipulating the independent variable after providing preliminary explanations that highlighted the critical experimental factors that are going to affect the outcome of the experiment. It is also important to point out that the individualized care plan’s application was the independent variable of the said quasi-experiment. They also made sure that the patients were not harmed, and this was demonstrated with the assistance of professional health care workers.
Reliable Content
Content validity was established due to the well-developed research design. The proponents of the study were able to demonstrate that they could document the outcome of the experiment. They were able to assure the elimination of errors and problematic research methods. However, this does not mean that they could support the assertion that they made at the beginning of the research process.
Appropriate Statistical Procedures
Appropriate statistical procedures were used because the research team members chose a data analysis framework suited to the measurement and detection of significant differences in the respondents’ values. In other words, the statistical procedures that were leveraged to interpret the research outcomes could compare the control and intervention groups’ responses.
Reliable and Valid Quantitative Measures and Instruments
One can make the argument that the proponents of the study utilized a reliable and valid qualitative measurement framework because of the adoption of the European HF Self-Care Behavior Scale and the SF-36, which are both validated measurement tools (Larsen & Pedersen, 2016).
Overall Validity Based on Data Analysis
Statistical analysis was utilized to analyze research outcomes. The application of the statistical program SPSS version 2.0 validated the appropriateness of the interpretation of the results. This process was reinforced by the use of the t-test and the chi-square test for added validity. However, it was not easy to accept the data source’s veracity, but not the interpretation of the same.
Overall Validity Based on Outside Sources
The proponents of the study concluded that there was no significant difference in using the individualized care plan compared to the conventional method that requires a visit to the outpatient clinic. Thus, the use of the proposed intervention strategy is not a better option in improving the health status of HF patients. There are outside sources that validated the overall interpretation regarding the effectiveness of the individualized care plan strategy. In one study, Ades et al. (2013) pointed out the absence of verifiable evidence favoring using the said intervention strategy. The same type of reservation was echoed by Dickson et al. (2013). Nevertheless, it imperative to refine the research design because, in Greaves et al. (2016), the authors cited the high level of satisfaction and engagement from caregivers and patients. For example, Mampuya (2012) highlighted the importance of patient education.
Acknowledging Limitations
One can also argue that the proponents of the study had reservations regarding the absence of a randomized type of trial. They acknowledged that it was impossible to use the principle of randomization due to the experiment’s nature. However, it was difficult to establish that the respondents in the intervention group did not suffer from more serious medical problems than their counterparts in the control group.
Implications for Practice and Further Research
Based on the study’s outcome, one can argue that individualized care plans are not superior to conventional rehabilitation methods. Thus, there is no need to develop more expensive individualized intervention strategies. On the other hand, the experiment results negate the popular notion of encouraging the participation of HF patients in the rehabilitation process.
Conclusion: Use of the Article
It is imperative to modify the research design to pre-select HF patients to prevent the inclusion of respondents with different levels of medical problems. It is only through applying this type of improvement that ensures the usefulness of the research outcome. In the absence of refined protocols that help filter the severity of the medical condition or medical complications, there is no way to eliminate other causal factors that may have affected the patient’s decision-making process. In other words, the data collection framework is prone to errors. There is a need to modify the research design to develop a framework that adheres closer to a conventional data-gathering experiment enhanced by a randomized trial feature. It is not prudent to endorse the use of this article in the context of practical implications within the nursing profession.
References
Ades, P., Keteyiah, S., Balady, G., Houston-Miller, N., Kitzman, D., Mancini, D., & Rich, M. (2013). Cardiac rehabilitation exercise and self-care for chronic hearth failure. Journal of American College of Cardiology, 1(6), 540-547.
Dickson, V., Nocella, J., Yoon, H., Hammer, M., Melkus, G., Chyun, D. (2013). Cardiovascular disease self-care interventions. Nursing Research and Practice, Web.
Greaves, C., Wingham, J., Deighan, C., Doherty, P., Elliott, J., Armitage, W., Taylor, R., & Dalal, H. (2016). Optimizing self-care support for people with heart failure and their caregivers. Pilot and Feasibility Studies, 2(37), 1-12.
Larsen, P., & Pedersen, P. (2014). The effectiveness of individual rehabilitation on health status in patients with heart failure: A quasi-experiment study. Journal of Nursing Interventions, 22(1), 15-21.
Mampuya, W. (2012). Cardiac rehabilitation past, present, and future: An overview.