Running head: QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE STUDIES CRITIQUE 1
Qualitative and Quantitative Studies Critique
Student Name
Institution
, QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE STUDIES CRITIQUE
2
Qualitative and Quantitative Studies Critique
Studies indicate that the rate of patients surviving critical illness episodes has been on a
steady and continuing increase over the years. According to Clarissa et al. (2019), these patient
developments can be attributed to technological advancements in the field of intensive care
medicine. Nevertheless, the issue of mobility in mechanically ventilated patients still remains a
matter of concern for clinicians. For this reason, there has been increased research on respiratory
physiotherapy over the years with the aim of finding ways of responding to mechanically
ventilated patient needs. The four articles in question, thus, answer the PICOT question by
identifying some suitable interventions to improve mobility in mechanically ventilated patients.
This paper will provide a critical analysis of two quantitative studies and two qualitative studies
that address the issue of mobility in mechanically ventilated patients.
Background
Is there a difference in early mobilization between mechanically ventilated clinical and
surgical patients in ICU? is a quantitative study that compares mobilization practices
administered to ICU-admitted patients to intervention approaches. The main problem is that
extended hospital stays usually result in the development of neuromuscular and respiratory
disorders which, in turn, derail functional independence. The study is important because it
acknowledges early mobilization in the patient recovery processes as a way of
reversing/minimizing neuromuscular dysfunctions of mechanically ventilated patients (de Matos
et al., 2016). The purpose of the study is to examine how physiotherapists deal with different
patients who require critical attention after surgery or after being admitted to the ICU. The
Qualitative and Quantitative Studies Critique
Student Name
Institution
, QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE STUDIES CRITIQUE
2
Qualitative and Quantitative Studies Critique
Studies indicate that the rate of patients surviving critical illness episodes has been on a
steady and continuing increase over the years. According to Clarissa et al. (2019), these patient
developments can be attributed to technological advancements in the field of intensive care
medicine. Nevertheless, the issue of mobility in mechanically ventilated patients still remains a
matter of concern for clinicians. For this reason, there has been increased research on respiratory
physiotherapy over the years with the aim of finding ways of responding to mechanically
ventilated patient needs. The four articles in question, thus, answer the PICOT question by
identifying some suitable interventions to improve mobility in mechanically ventilated patients.
This paper will provide a critical analysis of two quantitative studies and two qualitative studies
that address the issue of mobility in mechanically ventilated patients.
Background
Is there a difference in early mobilization between mechanically ventilated clinical and
surgical patients in ICU? is a quantitative study that compares mobilization practices
administered to ICU-admitted patients to intervention approaches. The main problem is that
extended hospital stays usually result in the development of neuromuscular and respiratory
disorders which, in turn, derail functional independence. The study is important because it
acknowledges early mobilization in the patient recovery processes as a way of
reversing/minimizing neuromuscular dysfunctions of mechanically ventilated patients (de Matos
et al., 2016). The purpose of the study is to examine how physiotherapists deal with different
patients who require critical attention after surgery or after being admitted to the ICU. The
