Yu-Feng Yvonne Chan1, Lynne D Richardson1, Roxanne Nagurka2, Ke Hao3, Sergey B Zaets1, Michael B Brimacombe4, Susanne Bentley1, Steven R Levine5. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York 10029, USA. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Rutgers, New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey 07103, USA. 3. Department of Genetics and Genomic Sciences Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York 10029, USA. 4. Department of Biostatistics, Division of Biostatistics, Rutgers, New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey 07103, USA. 5. Department of Neurology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York 10029, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since the emergency department (ED) waiting room hosts a large, captive audience of patients and visitors, it may be an ideal location for conducting focused stroke education. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of various stroke education methods. METHODS:Patients and visitors of an urban ED waiting room were randomized into one of the following groups: video, brochure, one-to-one teaching, combination of these three methods, or control group. We administered a 13-question multiple-choice test to assess stroke knowledge prior to, immediately after, and at 1 month post-education to patients and visitors in the ED waiting room. RESULTS: Of 4 groups receiving education, all significantly improved their test scores immediately post intervention (test scores 9.4±2.5-10.3±2.0, P<0.01). At 1 month, the combination group retained the most knowledge (9.4±2.4) exceeding pre-intervention and control scores (both 6.7±2.6, P<0.01). CONCLUSION: Among the various stroke education methods delivered in the ED waiting room, the combination method resulted in the highest knowledge retention at 1-month post intervention.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Since the emergency department (ED) waiting room hosts a large, captive audience of patients and visitors, it may be an ideal location for conducting focused stroke education. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of various stroke education methods. METHODS:Patients and visitors of an urban ED waiting room were randomized into one of the following groups: video, brochure, one-to-one teaching, combination of these three methods, or control group. We administered a 13-question multiple-choice test to assess stroke knowledge prior to, immediately after, and at 1 month post-education to patients and visitors in the ED waiting room. RESULTS: Of 4 groups receiving education, all significantly improved their test scores immediately post intervention (test scores 9.4±2.5-10.3±2.0, P<0.01). At 1 month, the combination group retained the most knowledge (9.4±2.4) exceeding pre-intervention and control scores (both 6.7±2.6, P<0.01). CONCLUSION: Among the various stroke education methods delivered in the ED waiting room, the combination method resulted in the highest knowledge retention at 1-month post intervention.
Authors: A M Pancioli; J Broderick; R Kothari; T Brott; A Tuchfarber; R Miller; J Khoury; E Jauch Journal: JAMA Date: 1998 Apr 22-29 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Yu-Feng Yvonne Chan; Roxanne Nagurka; Lynne D Richardson; Sergey B Zaets; Michael B Brimacombe; Steven R Levine Journal: J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 2.136
Authors: R L Sacco; B Boden-Albala; R Gan; X Chen; D E Kargman; S Shea; M C Paik; W A Hauser Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 1998-02-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: W D Rosamond; A R Folsom; L E Chambless; C H Wang; P G McGovern; G Howard; L S Copper; E Shahar Journal: Stroke Date: 1999-04 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Lewis B Morgenstern; Lara Staub; Wenyaw Chan; Theodore H Wein; L Kay Bartholomew; Mary King; Robert A Felberg; W Scott Burgin; Janet Groff; Susan L Hickenbottom; Kamaldeen Saldin; Andrew M Demchuk; Anjali Kalra; Anupma Dhingra; James C Grotta Journal: Stroke Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 7.914