STUDY OBJECTIVE: This study determined whether Spanish and English educational videos are superior to routine discussion for informing emergency department (ED) patients about risks, benefits, and alternatives to receiving intravenous contrast for computed tomography (CT). METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled trial was performed on a convenience sample of adult ED patients scheduled to receiveintravenous contrast for CT. Patients randomized to the intervention group watched a video in Spanish or English explaining the procedure and its risks, benefits, and alternatives. The control group underwent routine discussion, receiving intravenous contrast information from their emergency physician. After their educational sessions, all participants completed a 10-question intravenous contrast knowledge measure and 1 question rating satisfaction with the informed consent process. Mean scores were compared to assess whether the videos were superior to routine discussion for educating patients about intravenous contrast. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of satisfied patients and refusals to sign consent. RESULTS: Of the 112 patients enrolled, 56 were randomized to the video group and 56 to routine discussion. Five patients withdrew from the study, leaving 107 for analysis (video N=53; control N=54). Mean knowledge scores were higher in the video group (68.1%) compared to routine discussion (47.8%) (95% confidence interval [CI] for the difference 12.6% to 28.1%). Video-group patients exhibited greater satisfaction than routine-discussion patients (86.8% [95% CI 74.6% to 94.5%] versus 77.4% [95% CI 63.8% to 87.7%]). All patients signed consent to receive intravenous contrast. CONCLUSION: Using Spanish and English educational videos yielded higher intravenous contrast knowledge scores compared with routine informed consent procedures.
RCT Entities:
STUDY OBJECTIVE: This study determined whether Spanish and English educational videos are superior to routine discussion for informing emergency department (ED) patients about risks, benefits, and alternatives to receiving intravenous contrast for computed tomography (CT). METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled trial was performed on a convenience sample of adult ED patients scheduled to receive intravenous contrast for CT. Patients randomized to the intervention group watched a video in Spanish or English explaining the procedure and its risks, benefits, and alternatives. The control group underwent routine discussion, receiving intravenous contrast information from their emergency physician. After their educational sessions, all participants completed a 10-question intravenous contrast knowledge measure and 1 question rating satisfaction with the informed consent process. Mean scores were compared to assess whether the videos were superior to routine discussion for educating patients about intravenous contrast. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of satisfied patients and refusals to sign consent. RESULTS: Of the 112 patients enrolled, 56 were randomized to the video group and 56 to routine discussion. Five patients withdrew from the study, leaving 107 for analysis (video N=53; control N=54). Mean knowledge scores were higher in the video group (68.1%) compared to routine discussion (47.8%) (95% confidence interval [CI] for the difference 12.6% to 28.1%). Video-group patients exhibited greater satisfaction than routine-discussion patients (86.8% [95% CI 74.6% to 94.5%] versus 77.4% [95% CI 63.8% to 87.7%]). All patients signed consent to receive intravenous contrast. CONCLUSION: Using Spanish and English educational videos yielded higher intravenous contrast knowledge scores compared with routine informed consent procedures.
Authors: Khodayar Goshtasbi; Mehdi Abouzari; Omid Moshtaghi; Marlon Maducdoc; Brandon M Lehrich; Harrison W Lin; Hamid R Djalilian Journal: Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2019-03-19 Impact factor: 3.497
Authors: Audrey Harkness; Brooke G Rogers; Daniel Mayo; Rosana Smith-Alvarez; John E Pachankis; Steven A Safren Journal: Arch Sex Behav Date: 2022-06-28
Authors: Ari-Nareg Meguerditchian; Dale Dauphinee; Nadyne Girard; Tewodros Eguale; Kristen Riedel; André Jacques; Sarkis Meterissian; David L Buckeridge; Michal Abrahamowicz; Robyn Tamblyn Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2012-07-25 Impact factor: 2.655