Literature DB >> 29625993

An Observational Study of the Association of Video- Versus Text-Based Informed Consent With Multicenter Trial Enrollment: Lessons From the PALM Study (Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management).

Alexander C Fanaroff1, Shuang Li2, Laura E Webb2, Vincent Miller2, Ann Marie Navar2, Eric D Peterson2, Tracy Y Wang2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patient participation in clinical research is low, in part because of the length and complexity of the informed consent process. Video informed consent may enhance the appeal of research and help break down barriers to participation. METHODS AND
RESULTS: The PALM study (Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management) enrolled 7904 patients at cardiology, endocrinology, and primary care clinics across the United States to evaluate cholesterol management practices. Of 153 participating clinics, 67 (43.8%) secured institutional review board approval to use a tablet-based video informed consent tool that patients could select to navigate through the informed consent process instead of traditional text-based informed consent. At sites without institutional review board approval of video consent, all patients read a text-based informed consent document. Site activation times and enrollment volumes, as well as characteristics of enrolled patients, were compared between sites with and without video consent capability. Sites with video consent capability more often used a central institutional review board (89.6% versus 73.3%), were more often rural (16.7% versus 3.8%), and tended to have fewer providers. Compared with sites without video consent capability, sites with video consent capability had shorter times from site approach to first patient enrollment (median 178 versus 207 days; P=0.02). Sites with video consent capability enrolled similar numbers of patients as sites without video consent capability (P=0.48) but enrolled a greater proportion of patients who were ≥75 years old (27.5% versus 23.6%; P<0.001) and nonwhite (17.7% versus 14.2%; P<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: In this observational study of recruitment in a multicenter registry, sites approved for video consent use enrolled the same number of patients as sites with only traditional text-based informed consent but had faster speed to first patient enrolled and more often enrolled older and nonwhite patients. Future randomized trials are needed to assess the impact of video consent on enrollment mechanics and demographics. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02341664.
© 2018 American Heart Association, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  informed consent; patient participation; primary health care; registries; tablets

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29625993      PMCID: PMC5891825          DOI: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.118.004675

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes        ISSN: 1941-7713


  20 in total

Review 1.  Enduring and emerging challenges of informed consent.

Authors:  Christine Grady
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2015-02-26       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 2.  Trial watch: Trends in clinical trial design complexity.

Authors:  Kenneth A Getz; Rafael A Campo
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 84.694

3.  Ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel by geographic region in the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial.

Authors:  Kenneth W Mahaffey; Daniel M Wojdyla; Kevin Carroll; Richard C Becker; Robert F Storey; Dominick J Angiolillo; Claes Held; Christopher P Cannon; Stefan James; Karen S Pieper; Jay Horrow; Robert A Harrington; Lars Wallentin
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2011-06-27       Impact factor: 29.690

4.  Health Literacy and Informed Consent Materials: Designed for Documentation, Not Comprehension of Health Research.

Authors:  Vanessa Watts Simonds; Eva Marie Garroutte; Dedra Buchwald
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2017-07-31

5.  Randomized, Controlled Trial of an Advance Care Planning Video Decision Support Tool for Patients With Advanced Heart Failure.

Authors:  Areej El-Jawahri; Michael K Paasche-Orlow; Dan Matlock; Lynne Warner Stevenson; Eldrin F Lewis; Garrick Stewart; Marc Semigran; Yuchiao Chang; Kimberly Parks; Elizabeth S Walker-Corkery; Jennifer S Temel; Hacho Bohossian; Henry Ooi; Eileen Mann; Angelo E Volandes
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2016-07-05       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 6.  The Changing Landscape of Randomized Clinical Trials in Cardiovascular Disease.

Authors:  W Schuyler Jones; Matthew T Roe; Elliott M Antman; Mark J Pletcher; Robert A Harrington; Russell L Rothman; William J Oetgen; Sunil V Rao; Mitchell W Krucoff; Lesley H Curtis; Adrian F Hernandez; Frederick A Masoudi
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2016-10-25       Impact factor: 24.094

7.  Assessing end-of-life preferences for advanced dementia in rural patients using an educational video: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Angelo E Volandes; Laurie Anne Ferguson; Aretha D Davis; Nathan C Hull; Michael J Green; Yuchiao Chang; Kristy Deep; Michael K Paasche-Orlow
Journal:  J Palliat Med       Date:  2011-01-21       Impact factor: 2.947

8.  Personal physicians as study investigators: impact on patients' willingness to participate in clinical trials.

Authors:  Noëlle S Sherber; Neil R Powe; Joel B Braunstein
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2009-01-15       Impact factor: 2.226

9.  Central challenges facing the national clinical research enterprise.

Authors:  Nancy S Sung; William F Crowley; Myron Genel; Patricia Salber; Lewis Sandy; Louis M Sherwood; Stephen B Johnson; Veronica Catanese; Hugh Tilson; Kenneth Getz; Elaine L Larson; David Scheinberg; E Albert Reece; Harold Slavkin; Adrian Dobs; Jack Grebb; Rick A Martinez; Allan Korn; David Rimoin
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-03-12       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Participation of the elderly, women, and minorities in pivotal trials supporting 2011-2013 U.S. Food and Drug Administration approvals.

Authors:  Nicholas S Downing; Nilay D Shah; Joseph H Neiman; Jenerius A Aminawung; Harlan M Krumholz; Joseph S Ross
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2016-04-14       Impact factor: 2.279

View more
  4 in total

1.  Audiovisual Modules to Enhance Informed Consent in the ICU: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Tyler J Loftus; Maria E Alfaro; Tiffany N Anderson; Travis W Murphy; Olga Zayko; John P Davis; Zachary A Hothem; Dijoia B Darden; Rohit P Patel; Wanda Whittet; Edward K McGough; Azra Bihorac; Chasen A Croft; Martin D Rosenthal; R Stephen Smith; Erin L Vanzant; Fredrick A Moore; Scott C Brakenridge; Gabriela L Ghita; Babette A Brumback; Alicia M Mohr; Philip A Efron
Journal:  Crit Care Explor       Date:  2020-11-23

2.  Streamlining the institutional review board process in pragmatic randomized clinical trials: challenges and lessons learned from the Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-Term Effectiveness (ADAPTABLE) trial.

Authors:  Guillaume Marquis-Gravel; Holly Robertson; W Schuyler Jones; Danielle Riley; Daniel E Ford; David Crenshaw; Yvonne A Joosten; Lindsey Rudov; Adrian F Hernandez; Rachel Hess
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2021-01-25       Impact factor: 2.279

Review 3.  Diversity in Alzheimer's disease drug trials: The importance of eligibility criteria.

Authors:  Sanne Franzen; Jade Emily Smith; Esther van den Berg; Monica Rivera Mindt; Rozemarijn L van Bruchem-Visser; Erin L Abner; Lon S Schneider; Niels D Prins; Ganesh M Babulal; Janne M Papma
Journal:  Alzheimers Dement       Date:  2021-09-30       Impact factor: 16.655

Review 4.  Opportunities and counterintuitive challenges for decentralized clinical trials to broaden participant inclusion.

Authors:  Noah Goodson; Paul Wicks; Jayne Morgan; Leen Hashem; Sinéad Callinan; John Reites
Journal:  NPJ Digit Med       Date:  2022-05-05
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.