The title of the article under review by Hooper et al. (2010), entitled, Compassion satisfaction, burnout, and compassion fatigue among emergency nurses compared with nurses in other selected inpatient specialties, befits the issue under study because it is a phenomenon, including the affected group. Its abstract effectively summarises the report’s main features clearly and concisely. The problem under study can easily be identified because of how it is presented. The problem statement built a persuasive argument for the study because it demonstrated that higher burnout rates also occur in other inpatient specialties. This revelation indicated that the problem was significant in the nursing profession. There is a good match between the research problem and the qualitative research approach used. The burnout rate of nurses can only be ascertained if their views concerning the situation are factored in.
The article explicitly stated the research questions in line with the study’s conceptual framework. The study’s literature review is adequate and thoroughly summarizes the existing knowledge on the issue. It forms a solid basis for the new research by properly comparing burnout rates between ER nurses and those working in other specialties. The key concepts, such as compassion burnout and satisfaction, are adequately defined conceptually. Moreover, the study protected the rights of the participants by obtaining approval from the Institutional Review Boards of the healthcare system and local universities for the initiation of data collection. Written consent to participate in the study was waived by the Institutional Review Boards, where the return of the completed surveys was taken as the implied consent to participate. Therefore, the study was designed to minimize risks to the participants by giving them the right to choose. The study used the survey method to collect and analyze data congruent with established procedures. The study had adequate participants drawn from the ER and three other specialty sections, including oncology, intensive care, and nephrology.
Comparisons
A quantitative matrix is an approach that uses logical and statistical observations to conclude, while a qualitative matrix depends on written and verbal data. In brief, quantitative research is represented using numbers or graphs, while quantitative matrixes are expressed by words derived from prescribed data sets. Each of these matrixes has its importance in research. For instance, the qualitative matrix is helpful in its ability to uncover ideas, trends, and opinions and provides deeper insights into the problem at hand. On the other hand, quantitative matrixes are mainly used to understand underlying reasons, motivations, and thoughts. It is helpful in the development of hypotheses and ideas.
The qualitative approach helps researchers interpret human intentions, experiences, attitudes, and behaviors. It is an exploratory and unstructured approach that deals with complex and nearly impossible phenomena. It is usually conducted to provide deep insights into a problem using the interview method using open-ended questions and observations, which are typically expressed in words.
On the other hand, the qualitative research method depends on methods used in natural sciences to come up with numerical data and hard facts. Different computational and statistical approaches help establish the cause-and-effect relationship between two variables. It is also known as empirical research because its results are precise and accurate. It helps generalize facts about a particular issue by conducting experiments and surveys to ascertain the truth.
Reference
Hooper, C., Craig, J., Janvrin, D. R., Wetsel, M. A., & Reimels, E. (2010). Compassion satisfaction, burnout, and compassion fatigue among emergency nurses compared with nurses in other selected inpatient specialties. Journal of emergency nursing, 36(5), 420-427. Web.