Research Summary and Ethical Considerations

The purpose of this paper is to make a summary of the article “Pressure Ulcer Incidence in Patients Wearing Nasal-Oral Versus Full-Face Noninvasive Ventilation Masks” based on the research by Schallom et al. and examine ethical considerations applied to ascertain the safety of the participants throughout the course of the study. The article reveals that noninvasive aeration aims at relieving symptoms related to hypoventilation, impending comfort, evading intubation, and invasive ventilation. The research compared the efficiency of utilizing the full-face mask to that of the nasal-oral mask and discovered that the former is better is term of decreasing the occurrence of pressure ulcers associated with the noninvasive aeration masks due to the larger exterior area for force allocation.

Background of the Study

The challenge at hand is connected with the necessity for a correct strategy that could be used in nursing to counter the device-related pressure ulcers, which appear with wearing noninvasive ventilation masks, which have an effect on skin veracity and make the patients feel uncomfortable (Schallom et al., 2015). The mentioned issue was evaluated in the article with an aim to offer the ways that could be helpful in mitigating the problem easily and professionally. Studying the problem aids the employees in the nursing field to deal with patients’ issues in a manner that produces positive results. Furthermore, the study encourages and provides reasons for the nursing community to work harder and strive to help the patients to the maximum extent since it is the essential for those who are in need of support.

The purpose of the research is to determine the relevance of using the intervention of full-face masks as opposed to nasal-oral mask for the purpose of evading pressure ulcer that might be associated with noninvasive ventilation masks. Therefore, the study intends to generate results that are worth to become common in nursing practice. As for the objective of the research, it is connected with scrutinizing the occurrence, place, and phase of pressure ulcers and the discomfort the patients experience with the application of a nasal-oral mask comparing to the full-face mask (Esquinas, 2015). Thus, the results are meant to assist the nursing communities worthwhile and prove effective in term of reducing the instances of pressure ulcers among patients. Some of the research questions are:

1. What interventions can be utilized to counter the increase in pressure ulcers?
2. What are the advantages of utilizing full-face masks as opposed to the application of nasal-oral masks to fight against the pressure ulcers?
3. What are the limitations of using full-face masks as an intervention method?

The notion being used in the study is that of the utilization of noninvasive ventilation, which is connected with device-related growth of pressure ulcers under the facade. As for the phenomenon, a pressure ulcer is a disorder that by affecting the patients’ well-being touches the nursing community and calls for the appropriate interventions to replace those that are not fully operational.

Methods of the Study

The method that was utilized in the article is the quantitative study because it entailed measuring the incidence, quantifying data, and generalizing outcomes from the sample to discover the underlying issues of masks application and pressure ulcers. The survey of patients wearing two types of masks was extensive and had a fairly large number of participants to ensure that the sample is representative. The approach offered an insight into developing interventions that can be put into practice to counter the challenge. Basically, the research design presupposed using a before-after comparison study undertaken in the five Intensive Care Units at the University-Affiliated Medical Center. The process also comprised the participation of 200 patients with noninvasive ventilation on pressure ulcers. The evaluation was done by means of the power analysis sample size (Schallom et al., 2015). The procedure entailed the assessment of the skin integrity when noninvasive ventilation was applied. The Intensive Care Unit initiated the documentation process. Furthermore, the therapists and nurses who began the application and adjustment of the masks on the mannequin guaranteed the effectiveness of the procedure.

Result of the Study

The results of the study show that the pressure ulcer growth differs greatly between the application of full-face facade and the nasal-oral cover. The results reveal that at the nasal-oral stage 20% of participants had pressure ulcer that had developed on the lower face due to the straps. On the contrary, only 2% of patients in the full-face mask phase had a pressure ulcer. The membrane evaluation, which was done each time when the mask was detached, demonstrated that the time of pressure ulcers discovery varied as well. The results also showed that patients who were utilizing the full-face mask reported lower rates of comfort score as opposed to the nasal-oral mask (Schallom et al., 2015). The total timeframe of using noninvasive ventilation was longer for nasal-oral in comparison to full-face masks facade since the participants were exchanged to the latter type only when the pressure ulcers were noted.

The implication of the findings to nursing is that the utilization of full-face masks has to be considered as a new approach to preventing pressure ulcers. The rationale for that is based on the fact that the nursing community needs the proper methods that could generate the desired outcomes. The findings apparently contribute considerably to the nursing know-how because they are capable of bringing more benefit than harm when the pressure ulcers are concerned. The study can, therefore, impact the practice, education, and administration (Esquinas, 2015). The impact is bound to be positive because there is a possibility of reaching significant results in the field of nursing on the matters associated with the disorder at hand.