OBJECTIVE: To systematically review audio-visual (AV) interventions for promoting informed consent (IC) in clinical practice and to consider the impact of reading age adjustment. METHODS: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing AV interventions to standard IC in clinical practice. Outcomes included recall (immediate <1 day; intermediate 1-14 days; late >14 days), satisfaction and anxiety. Data were synthesized using random effects meta-analyses. Comparisons were made between studies that did and did not adjust for participant reading age. RESULTS: Of 11,813 abstracts screened, 29 RCTs were eligible (30 intervention arms). Interventions included videos (n=17), computer programs (n=5), electronic presentations (n=3), compact discs (n=3) and websites (n=2). Meta-analysis showed AV interventions improved immediate recall (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-0.85). Results for intermediate and late recall were too heterogeneous to synthesize. AV interventions did not consistently affect either satisfaction or anxiety. Adjusting the reading age of interventions improved immediate recall (reading age interventions: adjusted SMD 1.21, 95%CI 0.81-1.61; non-reading age adjusted SMD 0.51, 95%CI 0.36-0.66). CONCLUSION: AV interventions, especially those adjusted for participant reading age, improve immediate information recall for IC. Practice implications Wider use of AV aids is justified when obtaining IC in clinical practice. Crown
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review audio-visual (AV) interventions for promoting informed consent (IC) in clinical practice and to consider the impact of reading age adjustment. METHODS: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing AV interventions to standard IC in clinical practice. Outcomes included recall (immediate <1 day; intermediate 1-14 days; late >14 days), satisfaction and anxiety. Data were synthesized using random effects meta-analyses. Comparisons were made between studies that did and did not adjust for participant reading age. RESULTS: Of 11,813 abstracts screened, 29 RCTs were eligible (30 intervention arms). Interventions included videos (n=17), computer programs (n=5), electronic presentations (n=3), compact discs (n=3) and websites (n=2). Meta-analysis showed AV interventions improved immediate recall (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-0.85). Results for intermediate and late recall were too heterogeneous to synthesize. AV interventions did not consistently affect either satisfaction or anxiety. Adjusting the reading age of interventions improved immediate recall (reading age interventions: adjusted SMD 1.21, 95%CI 0.81-1.61; non-reading age adjusted SMD 0.51, 95%CI 0.36-0.66). CONCLUSION: AV interventions, especially those adjusted for participant reading age, improve immediate information recall for IC. Practice implications Wider use of AV aids is justified when obtaining IC in clinical practice. Crown
Authors: Holly Antal; H Timothy Bunnell; Suzanne M McCahan; Chris Pennington; Tim Wysocki; Kathryn V Blake Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2017-01-19 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Allison L Moore; Justin B Howlett; Manraj K Phull; Lukhona L Mpungose; Sebastian R Samson Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2021-01-03 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Christian M Simon; Kai Wang; Laura A Shinkunas; Daniel T Stein; Paul Meissner; Maureen Smith; Rebecca Pentz; David W Klein Journal: J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics Date: 2021-08-19 Impact factor: 1.742
Authors: Fiona Wood; Sean Michael Martin; Andrew Carson-Stevens; Glyn Elwyn; Elizabeth Precious; Paul Kinnersley Journal: Health Expect Date: 2014-09-12 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Megan L Salter; Babak Orandi; Mara A McAdams-DeMarco; Andrew Law; Lucy A Meoni; Bernard G Jaar; Stephen M Sozio; Wen Hong Linda Kao; Rulan S Parekh; Dorry L Segev Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2014-08-28 Impact factor: 10.121