Research Design of the Study
Research designs are used to enhance research quality. Erdogan & Ozdemir’s (2021) study used a quantitative meta-analysis to examine the effect of digital distraction on acute pain in children. Isiyel et al. (2023) conducted a randomized, prospective study in a general outpatient pediatric ward at Hacettepe University. Lastly, Moustafa (2021) used a quasi-experimental design where 100 children were used as a sample all aged 4-10. All these research designs are critical in assembling all the tools necessary.
Threats to Internal and External Validity
The articles selected contained threats to internal and external validity. Erdogan & Ozdemir (2021) conducted their research between November 2017 and August 2018. Thus, their study faced attrition, as participants could drop out over time. That is possible in case patients relocate from one place to another.
Moustafa (2021) has a potential statistical regression, which affects external validity. The tendency of results may yield only an average score when participants score significantly high or low. Isiyelet al. (2023) article faces threat of Hawthorne effect because it used 142 students aged 3-8 years. An 8-year-old child can modify their response to pain to better align with the study objectives.
Potential Ethical and Legal Issues
Researchers may exploit children in order to get information when children undergo painful procedures. For example, Moustafa’s (2021) study involved no intervention or control during Intravenous catheter insertion (IVCI), meaning the researcher collected data while the children experienced exacerbations during IVCI. During the research, Erdogan & Ozdemir (2021) spent three months completing questionnaires from one participant to another, meaning that the information recorded was potentially accessible to third parties during that time, which might trigger issues of data exposure in clinical practice. Although Isiyel et al. (2023) stated compliance with ethical principles, Hacettepe University might have allowed tmaysearch to be undertaken for marketing and competitive advantage purposes.
Data Analysis
The selected articles used an inextricably professional, standard approach to analyzing the data. For example, Isiyel et al. (2023) analyzed their data by calculating frequencies, medians, standard deviations, and percentages for specific variables using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Erdogan & Ozdemir (2021) analyzed their data using scores from the Visual Analog Scale, the Wong-Baker FACES, and the Children’s Fear Scale (CFS). Moustafa (2021) analyzed the data using descriptive statistics. Mean, standard deviation, and frequency were used to assess the intervention’s effect in the control groups.
Implications for Evidence-based
All research conducted in the three articles has specific implications for evidence-based practice. The work of Isiyel et al. (2023) shows that training parents to assist nurses in distracting children is effective in reducing children’s stress during the procedure and afterward. The article’s information opens eyes to the impact of electronic video games on reducing anxiety in children and to their implementation in pediatric clinics.
Erdogan & Ozdemir’s (2021) study implies that there are many cases of children who experience pain during health procedures in the absence of digital distraction. It helps provide nurses with insights into using distraction cards (DC), virtual reality, and buzzy techniques to minimize pain and anxiety in children. Moustafa’s (2021) research papers imply that joint pharmacological and cognitive behavioral remedies can be used to reduce discomfort for children during painful procedures performed in hospitals. The article can improve patient satisfaction in healthcare if the use of pressing softball is implemented for the latter patients.
Summary of the Evidence
Distraction techniques are effective in reducing pain, as the articles reviewed demonstrate. Erdogan & Ozdemir’s research makes the evidence cogent by showing that specific ways, such as virtual reality, can reduce procedural pain and control anxiety for children. Moustafa’s paper concludes that pressing a softball during IVCI is an effective way to decrease pain in children. Esiyel et al’s work concludes that passive distraction is an effective way of distraction, such as watching cartoons. The research has highlighted active distraction to be helpful, where a parent can read a book and ask their child questions during a painful procedure.
References
Erdogan, B., & Ozdemir, A. A. (2021). The effect of three different methods on venipuncture pain and anxiety in children: Distraction cards, virtual reality, and Buzzy (randomized controlled trial). Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 58, e54-e62.
Isiyel, E., Yurttas, M., Perktas, E., Ozmert, E., & Teksam, O. (2023). Effect of an active distraction method for pediatric venipuncture related pain and anxiety. Turk J Urol, 47(6), 518-525.
Moustafa, S. (2021). Effect of active distraction on children’s pain and behavioral response during intravenous catheter insertion. Child Care in Practice, 2(3), 1–12.