Critical Analysis of a Quantitative Study

Critical Analysis of a Quantitative Study

Protection of Human Participants

The authors have only addressed the benefits of the participation. Participation would allow the authors to examine the extent to which videoconferencing is used for consultation and information exchange in the entire patient trajectory. Moreover, it would make it possible to assess how collaboration between specialists and general practitioners influences patient treatment and learning. All the subjects gave their informed consent before being interviewed and observed and, therefore, they participated voluntarily (Nilsen, 2011). There was no approval from the institutional review board in the agency where the study took place.

Data Collection

The researcher does not identify the independent and dependent variables. In 2007 during a 5-month period, forty two videoconferences between the medical center and medical ward in the hospital were videotaped and observed. Out of the 42 conferences, 13 were for information exchange, 12- consultation, and 17- practical organizing (Nilsen, 2011). These categories enabled a comprehension of the videoconference meetings’ content. Depending on the meeting’s content, the videoconferences were conducted for fifteen minutes. Observations aimed at illuminating the learning opportunities between care levels as the conditions of patients changed overtime. Video recordings enabled the collaborative work’s microanalysis with time progression in the treatment trajectory (Nilsen, 2011).

The leading specialists and general practitioners who participated in the videoconferences were also interviewed. Semi-structured interviews were used and they were transcribed and recorded. Eight face-to-face interviews were conducted for 20-70 minutes starting from 2007 December (Nilsen, 2011). The interviews were aimed at allowing the specialists and general practitioners to express themselves in regard to videoconferencing use as well as discuss different themes based on observations. After participants gave their informed consent, there were videoconferences followed by interviews.

Data Management and Analysis

Interaction analysis was used for analyzing the observations. This is a strategy used for investigating nonverbal interaction and talk, as well as artifacts use in the interaction between objects and people during daily work practice. The interaction analysis made it possible to analyze the medical talk. The observations were transcribed, and the transcriptions and video recordings analyzed and discussed with medical professionals and supervisors. The categories of the interactions were based argumentation turns and tools use during the dialogue. Analyzing the daily practice interactions is imperative in comprehending the activities as a constituent of institutional practices and locally situated contexts (Kjeldmand & Holmström, 2008). The categories of the talk were based on traditional medical reasoning concepts; confirmation, treatment, information, and descriptions.

Video ethnography is vital for deliberating cultural and organizational change and it offered health professionals the chance to agree with and engage with the results. Interview analysis was vital for enriching the observations as the participants were able to express themselves depending on the themes and situations (Nilsen, 2011). The utterances used by the specialists and general practitioners when discussing information exchange and knowledge gaps were analyzed. During the analysis, no statistical software was used to enhance the accuracy.

A theoretical selection was used to analyze the data. The analysis is generalized to adhere to a theoretical debate as opposed to a larger group. This was done intentionally so as to be able to focus on collaborative work’s theme through the use of videoconferencing. This involved subjective medical talk experiences as a tool for knowledge and information sharing between care levels and the existing knowledge gaps. The ethical committee approved the study (Carroll et al., 2009).

Findings / Interpretation of Findings

Collaborative work plays a crucial role in improving continuity and coordination in treatment. There is a dire need for collaboration between specialists and general practitioner. Knowledge and information exchange through collaboration reveals contradictions between what is managed collectively and individually by physicians and develops chances for specialists’ and general practitioners’ learning (Nilsen, 2011). The study reveals what the interaction should entail and the benefits of collaborative activities. The study’s findings are accurate and valid. Moreover, they are a real reflection of reality and I have confidence in them. The findings have been presented following coherent logic. The researchers did not identify any limitations during the study.

The study makes it possible to understand how individual knowledge development results from everyday work activities. An analysis of the knowledge gaps and the strategies used by practitioners in bridging the gaps makes it easy to comprehend how learning opportunities can be maximized in daily medical practice (Burns & Grove, 2011). Workplace learning has been emphasized on as well as how collaborative work improves quality and develops novel work practices. The article highlights the importance for collaboration between specialists and general practitioners in patient treatment. The study places keen stress on boundary crossing activities and indicates that learning can occur at any level. Continuous information and knowledge exchange is vital and videoconference should be a regularly used tool. The author offers no suggestions for future studies.

References

Burns, N., & Grove, S. (2011). Understanding Nursing Research (5^th ed.). New York: Elsevier.

Carroll, C., Booth, A., Papaioannou, D., Sutton, A., & Wong, R. (2009). UK health‐care professionals’ experience of on‐line learning techniques: A systematic review of qualitative data. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 29(4), 235- 241.

Kjeldmand, D., & Holmström, I. (2008). Balint groups as a means to increase job satisfaction and prevent burnout among general practitioners. The Annals of Family Medicine, 6(2), 138-145.

Nilsen, L. L. (2011). Workplace learning among general practitioners and specialists. Journal of Workplace Learning, 23(8): 501-517.