Analisys of the Study on Administering Intramuscular Injections

Step1: The aim of the study, key finding of the survey, number of participants

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

In the study, Administering intramuscular injections: How does research translate into practice over time in the mental health setting? the aim was to assess the intramuscular injecting method choices by nurses working in the mental health setting. The study involved a total of 338 participants from the two research periods and identified six significant inter-temporal changes in intracellular drug application. These changes include two episodes of reduction in needle sizes, change in injection site based on the dose to be given, and application of slight pressure on the injection site (Wynaden et al., 2016). The study discovered that most nurses prefer the dorsolateral site for injection. However, the presence of the main blood vessels passing through this site makes it disadvantageous to target. The other result of the study is that there was an increase in the use of the Z-track method of injection. A significant decrease in alcohol wipe swabbing was the sixth identified practice change.

Step 2: Validity, Reliability, Trustworthiness, or Ethical Robustness of the Study

The reliability of the research results draws from the fact that the research used descriptive temporal cross-sectional studies which give information about two or more periods of time with higher levels of accuracy than those based on a one-time study (Wynaden et al., 2016). Moreover, the use of SPSS ensured the attainment of statistical precision, especially of quantitative data (Wynaden et al., 2016). Professional nurses performed the survey, and filling and returning of provided questionnaires showed their consent. The study upheld confidentiality and ethics approval to conduct both studies from each health service.

Step 3. Comparison and Contrast of the Study with Other Studies

According to Greenway (2004), movement of drugs injected at a point in the thigh region is slower than that of the arm. Nonetheless, drug uptake in the thighs is higher than that in the buttocks. Therefore, the thigh area is the best intramuscular injection point that facilitates better drug serum concentrations than can be attained in the gluteal muscles (McGarvey, 2001). The ventrolateral site is more recommended for intramuscular injection than the dorsolateral site that the study targeted. The underpinning for this preference is that fact that the ventrolateral site moderately takes in medication due to the presence of a thick layer of fat tissue. The adipose tissue makes it difficult for drug injection into muscle tissue using a standard needle (Small, 2004).

It is important to use smaller and more efficient drugs as in the study to penetrate the thick adipose layer. Therefore, it was wrong for nurses in the study to prefer dorsolateral site instead of the ventrolateral site. With smaller and efficient needles, it is easier to administer intracellular injections within the ventrolateral site even though it is small (McGarvey, 2001). In medical cases where repeated doses are necessary, other locations can be used as a supplementary. It is important to exercise due care when administering IM to avoid incidences such as contractures, hematoma, and injury to blood vessels, bones, and peripheral nerves.

References

Greenway K. (2004). Using the ventral gluteal site for intramuscular injection. Nursing Standard 18 (29): 39-42.

McGarvey MA (2001). Intramuscular injections: a review of nursing practice for adults. All Ireland J Nursing & Midwifery. 1(5): 185-193.

Small SP. (2004). Preventing sciatic nerve injury from intramuscular injection: literature review: J Advanced Nursing. 47(3): 287-296.

Wynaden, D., Tohotoa, J., AL Omari, O., Happell, B., Heslop, K., Barr, L., & Sourinathan, V. (2016). Administering intramuscular injections: How does research translate into practice over time in the mental health setting? Nurse Education Today 35 (2015) 620624.