Article Reflection paper Description

ARTICLE REFLECTION PAPER DESCRIPTION 5

ArticleReflection paper Description

ArticleReflection paper Description

of the Research Topic Covered by the Two Articles

Theaim of the two topics revolves around tautology. This means that thetopics speak and study about similar issues. The two topics aim atachieving almost related objectives. In this case, the two studiesare quite different in the procedures involved but retain the mainaim as the same. The two topics are hence stipulated below with eachhaving different results. Success is however achieved at the end ofthe two studies.

Thefirst research topic is sourced from the American Journal ofInfection control. The main topic of concentration is that ofevaluating the silver impregnated silver Foley catheter system withthe intention of preventing the catheter-related bacteriuria. Inaddition to the above main aim of the study, the topic also aims atachieving an avenue for further study about the same issue in thenear future. The topic revolves around a controlled test that wasdone in a university hospital under random selection of patientssuspected to suffer from such illness (Leuck, et al. 2015). Therandom trial that was done on patients was done on the adultssuspected to suffer from the urinary catheter. The process took 24hours to follow up and 48 hours once the discharge was done. Thedaily testing on the symptoms of the patients was done on a dailybasis. Of the 96 randomized cases, 65 of those patients were found tobe having catheter for about 24hrs. Of the 95 randomized cases, 11 ofthose were found to have the traces of asymptomatic bacteriuria. Thestudy concludes that the randomized process was effective inpreventing catheter-associated bacteriuria. On the other hand, themajor conclusion drawn is that a pivotal study is worth to conduct inthe future.

The second article elaborates more on the effectiveness of theurinary catheters on the patients affected by the spinal injury. As amatter of fact, the test involved is a randomized one carried out inparallel tests. A total of 742 patients is taken into considerationin the tests being carried out concurrently (Bonfill, et al. 2013). The patients are controlled and observed through online basis. Thetwo major processes that are involved in this study include theintention to that analysis as well as the primary analysis of thepatients. In this design, the catheters are used for 30 days. Theclinician is however at liberty to remove the catheters before thelapse of the 30 days if it turns to be necessary to do so. The studyis seen to be aiming at discovering how silver coated alloy urinarycatheter improves the UTIs in the patients with the spinal injuries.Therefore the main aim is to determine how effective the cathetersare in the patients with spinal injuries. The study concludes thatindeed the silver alloy coated catheters can improve ITUs in asignificant manner.

Similarityor Differences of the designs in the two studies

The two studies bring about a lot of similarities. The design initself is very similar in both studies. The two studies arerandomized in that the selection of the samples to use is notpre-determined. The patients taken about are selected on randombasis. On the other hand, the designs in both cases involve around 30days of observation. This means that the study involves quite almostthe same amount of time. In both cases, the studies involve theincorporation of the control experiment. The studies are set in a waythat they are aiming at achieving some set objective. Generally, thetopics try to determine the ways in which the catheter associatedbacteriuria can be prevented or even reduced to a desirable rate(Bonfill, et al. 2013). Continuous bacteriuria testing is done, andthis makes it possible to determine the symptoms of the infection.

Similaritiesor Differences of the findings in the two Studies

Just as in the design of the two studies, the findings of them tooshow major similarities. To begin with, the two studies reveal that apivotal study is important to carry out. This study is meant to provethe findings identified by the major study. In addition, theconfidence level of the findings of the study is increased as moreconfirmation of the findings is achieved. The two studies involvedifferent types of testing on how to prevent catheter infection(Leuck, et al. 2015). The two studies find out that the testsinvolved can help in [prevention of the infection as and under theconditions stipulated there in. However, the achievement of theresults must be well supported by the various methods that arediscussed of preventing infections among the patients. The twostudies confirm that the silver coated silicon catheters improve UTIsand at the same time prevent the condition that the study is aimingat checking on.

Understandingof the two studies

Both studies have various aspects that one can learn and understandfrom them. The studies portray how well the randomized trials bringabout better and more effective results than the pre-determinedtrials. The two studies are random and are carried out on randomlyselected patients. In both cases, the controlled tests are carriedout concurrently with the uncontrolled testing procedures. Thisenhances comparison of the results attained making the procedureapplied to be more effective. It comes with much understanding thatthe pivotal study is very paramount. This adds up to the main studyas well as improving the findings of the main study.

References

Bonfill,X., Rigau, D., Jáuregui-Abrisqueta, M. L., Chacón, J. M. B., de laBarrera, S. S., Alemán-Sánchez, C. M., … &amp Romano, L. L.(2013). A randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy andcost-effectiveness of urinary catheters with silver alloy coating inspinal cord injured patients: trial protocol. BMCurology,13(1),38.

Leuck,A. M., Johnson, J. R., Hunt, M. A., Dhody, K., Kazempour, K.,Ferrieri, P., &amp Kline, S. (2015). Safety and efficacy of a novelsilver-impregnated urinary catheter system for preventingcatheter-associated bacteriuria: A pilot randomized clinical trial.Americanjournal of infection control,43(3),260-265.