Evaluation of the Medical Journal "A Randomized Trial Of The Efficacy Of Hand Disinfection For Prevention Of Rhino Virus Infection"

Scientific evaluation of an article offers the student an opportunity to interact with a scholar’s journal that is of interest and suitable for the academic field of study. The aim is to develop insightful conception of the information that the author intended to pass to the target audience. Nevertheless, the student would be able to identify known knowledge about the topic of discourse, relate it with the emerging forms of information, take note of errors and limitations, and make a rational decision on whether concieve and how to apply the findings. This paper is thus an evaluation of the medical journal “A Randomized Trial of the Efficacy of Hand Disinfection for Prevention of Rhinovirus Infection” by Turner et al., (2012).

The Research Hypotheses

The null hypothesis formulated by the authors was that hand disinfection would not prevent transmission of Rhino Virus. On the other hand, the alternative hypothesis was that hand disinfection would prevent transmission of Rhino Virus (RV). The hypothesis were based on past research studies that suggested there being a high probability of direct hand contact being the predominant mechanism through which RV did spread.

The Variables

The variables include Exposure to the virus that might be in a liquid medium or direct inoculation and the presence of mucus.

The Study Design

The design utilized random distribution of the volunteers in order to ensure the data collected was equally spread. Those in the treatment group were asked to ensure that they applied the product in an interval of every three hours when awake for nine weeks after which the study could be complete. For assessment of compliance, the volunteers had to visit the study site each week for five weeks. Nevertheless, the study’s population was volunteers drawn from the University of Virginia Community. In observance and adherence to research ethical concerns, all the volunteers had to be eighteen years and above. It is often recommended that participants in any given form of research study be of eighteen years and above in order to ensure that they are able to make sound decisions without the influence of any other external force. The study only proceeded after obtaining written informed consent confirms that the participants had willfully agreed to be part of the study.

Sample Selection

The criteria for sample selection as can be inferred from the report were simple. For instance, participants who volunteered to take part in the study had to be eighteen years and above. Secondly, subjects who as per the assessment were in occupations that required frequent hand washing did not qualify to be part of the study. Thirdly, all potential volunteer participants had to be free of any form of skin conditions that could affect the study’s outcome or even endanger the life of the participant.

Completeness of the Data

The data that was collected was adequate and most relevant for the successful completion of the study. In order to ensure that only the required data was collected for the study, the collection procedure took into account certain significant assumptions which included; the probability of cold illness prevalence during the fall of RV being 0.7 per 100 persons a day or approximately 44 illnesses per one hundred volunteers for the 9 weeks period, an assumption the 65% of the illnesses resulted from RV, thus, could be prevented, that the efficacy of the hand treatment in aspects of prevention was 75%, and finally the assumption that was no placebo effect on the control group. Consequently, 92 subjects per arm were used since they projected a 90% power to reflect the effect of the treatment.

The Statistical Methods Used

The statistical methods of data analysis were used during the study. This includes the Chi-square, standard deviation, and probability test. The Chi-square method of data analysis is important for the analysis of variance which for this study was necessary for comparison of the findings; the standard deviation is significant for the proximity to the desired precision of the results. Probability test, on the other hand, measures the frequencies at which events are likely to occur.

Relations between the Text and the Data

The data reflects what is discussed in the text. For example at a confidence level of 95%, it was concluded that hand treatment did not significantly reduce Rhinovirus infection or rather the related the virus-related coldness. However, common coldness was reduced to some noticeable levels in the intent-to-treat analysis compared to the per-protocol analysis.

Conclusion

The study concluded that hand disinfection did not reduce Rhinovirus infection as well as Rhinovirus common cold illness. However, routine hand washing using hand sanitizers are effective for the removal of RV but have no persistent efficacy for the subsequent contaminations that might occur./p> Relevance of the Article to the Profession The inference made in the concluding remarks challenge pharmacist to put more efforts in their pharmacological tests to come with hand sanitizers that have longer and persistent activities after application for purposes of preventing subsequent contaminations.

Reference

Turner, R. B., Fuls, J. L., Rodgers, N. D., Goldfarb, H. B., Lockhart, L. K., & Aust, L. B. (2012). A randomized trial of the efficacy of hand disinfection for prevention of rhinovirus infection. Clinical infectious diseases, 54(10), 1-5.