Postoperative Arm Massage: A Support for Women With Lymph Node Dissection

Research Critique
Postoperative Arm Massage: A Support for Women With Lymph Node Dissection
Name
Course
Date
Article Research Critique
Abstract
The paper has a clear abstract that has defined the aim and the several sectors of the paper. The names of the authors have been included and the year of publication of the article has been clearly identified. The levels of nursing practice of the authors have been identified giving the paper much credibility.
Introduction
The paper lacks an introduction. What is provided as the introduction paragraph is a very short paragraph that only mentions the aim of the study at the end of the paragraph which is “to examine the usefulness of arm massage by a significant other in the immediate postoperative period” (Forchuck, 2004, p.264)
There are quite a number of subsections that are lacking in the introduction part. Firstly the authors have not identified the introduction part, after the abstract the authors have started writing about the women and breast cancer. This section should have been given more attention than what the authors have done. In the introduction section they should have provided background information on the problem under study. For instance, this section should have given the statistics on the number of women who are diagnosed annually of the breast cancer.
The statement of the problem lacks in the introduction part. Although it’s can be identified it in the summarized introduction part of the paper, a clear demarcation and identification for the statement of the problem should have been done. When the problem is identified it becomes easier for the reader to understand the magnitude of the problem under study.
Research questions are also vital in giving the reader a clear picture on the nature of the problem under study and the focus of the study. There are no research questions as the authors did not identify them. The variables for the study are not identified in the introduction part.
Literature Review
In the paper this section has been named as the current knowledge. It starts off by telling us how serious the issue of breast cancer was as by the year 2004 when the article was written with an estimated lifetime risk of 1 in 9 for every woman in Canada and the USA.
The section has discussed the lymph node dissection and has mentioned the pain that is associated with the dissection. The authors have also discussed the massage in relation to lymph node dissection and the number of people who have been affected indicating that 12% of women who have undergone breast surgery and lymph node dissection can constitute a handicap for the patients.
This section contains quite a number of sources that have been used to support massage as an alternative in solving the problems of pain that come after the dissection. The sources that have been used are within the framework of five years and have given a clear image on the nature of the problem under study. Several authors have supported the use of massage in tackling the postoperative problems of the lymph node dissection: range of motion and pain.
The authors have also identified the gap in the literature indicating that despite several documented literature on the effectiveness of massage therapy as an effective treatment intervention, no authors have focused on it a preventive measure against lymphedema
The next section contains the hypothesis and the sub hypothesis. This makes the paper more confusing as its organization seems not to follow standard framework for research writing.
Generally, there is more which needs to be done in this section. The sources are very informative and provide evidence on how massage has been recommended by other researchers. However, the sources should provide more information. For instance they should mention the procedures that the authors used in arriving at the recommendation for massage as an alternative solution to pain and range of motion. Also it’s important to mention how many people and what method was used in the studies that led to the recommendations for massage therapy. The theoretical framework is missing which should have been included based on the nature of the subject under study.
Research Methodology
Research design
The design was a randomized clinical trial with measures taken (1) prior to surgery, (2) within 24 hours postsurgery, (3) within 10 to 14 days postsurgery, and (4) 4 months postsurgery.
Population
There is no specific information given about the target population or region under study, further reading indicates that the study was carried in Ontario. However, it’s evidential that the target population was the breast cancer victims. The demographic data that was collected included: age, marital status, and educational level. Other descriptive data included length of time since diagnosis of breast cancer, type of surgery, and relationship to significant other.
Sampling
Sampling was initially completed with 14 individuals in order to pilot the procedure, test the instruments, and determine the power required for a final sample. The technique for sampling used had it that based on a power of .80 and P < .05, a minimum of 25 participants per group would be required. There were 30 participants per group recruited to allow for dropouts. Only one person dropped out (due to death). There were no refusals to participate. The authors had an inclusion and exclusion criteria identified in the paper.
Data collection methods
Clear methods of data collection have been identified and all the relevant details have been provided as indicated. Postoperative pain was measured using the numeric rating scale (NRS). Frequency of massages was recorded on a Post-Operative Arm Massage Record developed by the investigators. The Family Stressor Inve...