Introduction
The problem of congestive heart failure (CHF) among individuals who travel on a regular basis requires the attention of evidence-based practice research to develop a strategy to mitigate symptoms and prevent occurrence. Thus, the aim of the current study is to determine whether patient education about the management of their chronic and condition can reduce the rates of CHF and related exacerbations. Because the public health challenge must be quickly addressed, it is important to consider the available research on the issue and use the evidence in the development of a new intervention.
Comparison of Research Questions
The question for the current research has been developed in the PICOT format to identify the affected population, the intervention, the comparison, the expected outcome, and the timeline. The PICOT question is the following: in patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) who travel frequently (P), does education about the measures and precautions to take when traveling with CHF (I) compared to the absence of such education (C) reduce the incidence rate of exacerbations (O) within a year of having undergone the intervention (T)? The research question has been developed by drawing evidence from the research literature.
For example, Chang (2017) suggested that the management of CHF should emphasize the prevention of exacerbations and the education of patients regarding adherence to education (Aitken et al., 2019). Therefore, the research question considers the importance of education as a method of disseminating knowledge to patients and building trusting relationships between providers and the patients they serve.
In their study, Hammadah et al. (2017) studied the problem of air travel among patients with cardiovascular concerns. The researchers underlined the need for a thorough understanding of the bodily changes that occur during air travel, considering the influence of cardiovascular health and the risks of exacerbations. What is notable is that the research question of Hammadah et al. (2017) does not offer a solution to the issue and does not test the effectiveness of the recommended intervention in preventing the exacerbation of CHF and subsequent adverse outcomes associated with it. Therefore, their research is of exploratory nature instead of trying to find a solution to the problem. However, it should be noted that the article is valuable for compiling important information about the measures and precautions to take during air travel, even though it does not address other modes of transportation.
Comparison of Study Sample Populations
When it comes to the sample population to be involved in the current study, the target group will include patients diagnosed with congestive heart failure who travel on a regular basis. It is expected that at least fifty participants participate in the one-year intervention to receive education from their healthcare providers. The sample will be of such size may be considered small in quantitative research; however, this study sets the aim of teaching patients how they can prevent and manage chronic CHF during their travels. Having too large of a sample will present challenges in intervention adherence and follow-up to monitor progress.
In the study by Hammadah et al. (2017), the researchers do not identify a specific sample population and its size. Because there is no intervention being put to the test, there is no specific subset of the population acting as study participants. Nevertheless, it should be noted that the study focuses on the CHF patient population that air travels. In addition, the researchers differentiate between different patient subsets, such as those diagnosed with pulmonary arterial hypertension, stable heart failure, coronary artery disease, cardiac arrhythmia, as well as those with left ventricular assist devices.
Comparison of Study Limitations
Study limitations are essential to acknowledge during research because they illustrate the efforts of transparency taken on the part of researchers. The current study focusing on the PICOT question may be limited in its sample size as well as sampling procedure. Because the participants are the most likely to be chosen using convenience sampling, several disadvantages are likely to occur. Specifically, the results of convenience samples are hard to replicate, and there is no population representation (Andrade, 2020). The limitation of the study by Hammadah et al. (2017) was that it did not involve the exploration of patient and provider opinions on the effectiveness of the recommended intervention.
Conclusion and Recommendations for Future Research
To conclude, the recommendations for future research concern the implementation of a mixed-method study to draw from the benefits of both qualitative and quantitative research. The current study will allow seeing a quantitative difference pre-and post-intervention, and the future study can involve interviews with participants for identifying their attitudes and systematizing self-reported data. Besides the overall impact of patient education and training, it is also possible to test the effectiveness of specific preventive and management efforts. For example, the impact of beta-blockers use on addressing CHF among frequently traveling patients can be determined (Gotto & Toth, 2016). The levels of patient independence are also necessary to measure to determine whether the educational interventions have been effective in promoting patients’ management of their chronic conditions.
References
Aitken, L., Marshall, A., Chaboyer, W. (2019). Critical care nursing (4th ed.). Elsevier Health Sciences.
Andrade, C. (2020). The inconvenient truth about convenience and purposive samples. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 43(1), 86-88. Web.
Chang, E. (2017). Living with chronic illness and disability: Principles for nursing practice (3rd ed.). Elsevier Health Sciences.
Gotto, A. M. Jr., & Toth, P. P. (Eds.). (2016). Comprehensive management of high risk cardiovascular patients. CRC Press.
Hammadah, M., Kindya, B., Allard-Ratick, M., Jazbeh, S., Eapen, D., Tang, W., & Sperling, L. (2017). Navigating air travel and cardiovascular concerns: Is the sky the limit? Clinical Cardiology, 40(9), 660-666. Web.