Methodology
Sample
To obtain the appropriate results, the study requires a specific sample carefully selected to match the criteria determined by the hypothesis (Hulley, Cummings, Browner, Grady, & Newman, 2011). The project aims to assess the effectiveness of Pulsed Electromagnetic Field (PEMT) therapy for the treatment of diabetic neuropathic symptoms such as lower extremity pain in comparison to traditional methods such as medication (Aslam, Singh, & Rajbhandari, 2014). The intended sample size is 200 individuals. During the study, the sample is to be divided into two equal groups of 100 individuals each. The main inclusion criteria are a diagnosis of diabetic neuropathy accompanied by symptoms that fall within the range of those defined by the project and age (30-60 years).
The exclusion criteria are possible adverse reactions to the analgesics, antidepressants, and anti-seizure medications intended for use in the trial. It should be noted that such a small sample size is usually considered insufficient for producing statistically reliable data in quantitative research (DePoy & Gitlin, 2013). However, this sample size is appropriate for this particular study for several reasons. First, the study is preliminary, which means that its initial results are to be used for priming further research. Second, the sample size needs to be realistic concerning the resources and time at the disposal of the research team. Also, the sample is expected to be further limited by the reluctance of participants to engage in activities involving EMF equipment. Considering these conditions, the size of the sample is sufficient for obtaining reliable preliminary data.
The majority of data will be collected immediately after applying the respective methods of treatment by assessing the amount of pain experienced before and after the treatment. Therefore, the data will be collected in a hospital setting in a room where the participants will not be distracted (Dutton, 2014). Such a setting eliminates perception errors which may be introduced by delays. The final summative evaluation will be performed in the same setting since it is expected to produce the least amount of distraction and unexpected alterations of participants’ perceptions.
Sampling Strategy
The sample will be chosen by approaching current and past patients of several local hospitals. The process is expected to be performed with permission from and in collaboration with the hospital management. Thus, the sampling strategy can be described as purposive sampling (Guyatt, 2014). Because this strategy employs a non-probability sampling technique, it does not allow the sample to accurately represent the population as a whole (DePoy & Gitlin, 2013). However, it is appropriate in this case because the research hypothesis restricts the scope of the study to individuals diagnosed with diabetic neuropathy. Any probability sampling strategy would require a significantly larger sample without necessarily improving the quality of results.
Research Design
The participants are to assess their levels of pain using the interval/ratio scale, which allows the researcher to quantitatively analyze the results and answer the research question (Vogt, Gardner, & Haeffele, 2012). Therefore, the project has a quantitative research design. The design does not include a control group since this would significantly decrease an already-small sample size. The procedure is not blind since the pain treatment methods are noticeably different and do not allow for consistent blinding. Also, it is expected that at least some participants will specify their inability to subject themselves to either EMF exposure or medication (Yadollahpour & Jalilifar, 2014). Therefore, the groups are to be formed at least partially based on the preferences of participants, which excludes randomization and suggests a quasi-experimental design (Vogt et al., 2012). Such a design is the most appropriate considering the size of the sample, the resources at the disposal of the research team, and the goal of the project.
References
Aslam, A., Singh, J., & Rajbhandari, S. (2014). Pathogenesis of painful diabetic neuropathy. Pain Research and Treatment, 2014(1), 1-7.
DePoy, E., & Gitlin, L.N. (2013). Introduction to research: Understanding and applying multiple strategies. St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Health Sciences.
Dutton, M. (2014). Dutton’s introduction to physical therapy and patient skills. New York, NY: McGraw Hill Professional.
Guyatt, G. (2014). Users’ guides to the medical literature: A manual for evidence-based clinical practice. New York, NY: McGraw Hill Professional.
Hulley, S.B., Cummings, S.R., Browner, W.S., Grady, D.G., & Newman, T.B. (2011).Designing clinical research. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Vogt, W.P., Gardner, D.C., & Haeffele, L.M. (2012). When to use what research design. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Yadollahpour, A., & Jalilifar, M. (2014). Electromagnetic fields in the treatment of wound: A review of current techniques and future perspective. Journal of Pure and Applied Microbiology, 8(4), 2863-2877.