Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, and evidence.

Respond  using one or more of the following approaches:

Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, and evidence.

Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.

Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

                                                         Main Post

Qualitative research utilizes a research design that takes shape over the course of a study and seeks to understand the realities and viewpoints of the participants (Polit & Beck, 2017). The qualitative study that I will be discussing for this week’s discussion is by Dannecker, Warne-Griggs, Royse & Hoffman (2019) on  Listening to Patients’ Voices: Workarounds Patients Use to Construct Pain Intensity Ratings. The researchers used an interpretivist design within this study. Interpretivism is a theoretical perspective that strives to make sense and understand the world from subjective experiences of individuals (Dannecker, Warne-Griggs, Royse, & Hoffman, 2019). 

 The purpose of this study was to understand the challenges that people who suffer from chronic pain face when trying to describe and rate their pain. A recurring theme within the study was that everyone perceives pain differently and that trying to rate it using traditional methods often times did not accurately represent their current pain levels (Dannecker, Warne-Griggs, Royse, & Hoffman, 2019). Many of the participants found it easier to remember a specific physical activity that caused their pain to become worse and use that experience to provide a valued context for communicating pain experiences (Dannecker, Warne-Griggs, Royse, & Hoffman, 2019). 

Appropriateness of Design 

 When conducting a qualitative study, it is important that the design used is appropriate for answering the questions the study seeks to answer (Polit & Beck, 2017).  The study conducted by Dannecker, Warne-Griggs, Royse, & Hoffman (2019) sought to understand and explain patients’ point of view regarding how they describe pain intensity, and the usefulness of pain intensity measures for describing their pain. This type of design incorporates phenomenology, which focuses on the meaning of lived experiences (Polit & Beck, 2017). By better understanding how physical activities can inflict pain, providers may be able to better evaluate and treat it. 

Ethical Challenges

There are some ethical challenges that researchers can face when conducting a qualitative study specifically in regards to informed consent. As mentioned earlier, a qualitative study design can change over the course of a study (Polit & Beck, 2017). Since the design can change throughout the study,  researchers cannot guarantee the direction of data collection methods such as interviews and observation (Houghton, Casey, Shaw, & Murphy, 2010). In order to address this concern, the researchers within this study obtained informed consent that was reviewed by their institutional review board and provided those patients with written study information before focus group meetings and written and verbal study information at those meetings (Dannecker, Warne-Griggs, Royse, & Hoffman, 2019). 

Qualitative Design

A qualitative research design was most appropriate for this specific study because it seeks to investigate phenomena in an in-depth and holistic fashion using a flexible research design (Polit & Beck, 2017). If the researchers would have used a quantitative design, they would have only sought to quantify or measure those patients pain without seeking to determine how or why different factors influenced their pain. The interpretivist approach was appropriate in seeking to understand those patient’s subjective view of pain (Dannecker, Warne-Griggs, Royse, & Hoffman, 2019). 

References

Dannecker, E. A., Warne-Griggs, M. D., Royse, L. A., & Hoffman, K. G. (2019). Listening to 

Patients’ Voices: Workarounds Patients Use to Construct Pain Intensity Ratings. Qualitative Health Research, 29(4), 484–497. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732318773714

Houghton CE, Casey D, Shaw D, & Murphy K. (2010). Ethical challenges in qualitative 

research: examples from practice. Nurse Researcher, 18(1), 15–25. Retrieved from 

https://search-ebscohost-com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rzh&AN=104957511&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2017). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for 

nursing practice (10th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.