Dataset Information

Recruitment and retention: A randomized controlled trial of video-enhanced versus standard consent processes within the E-OPTIMAL study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND/AIMS:In this study, we compared two research consent techniques: a standardized video plus usual consent and usual consent alone. METHODS:Individuals who completed 24-month outcomes (completers) in the Operations and Pelvic Muscle Training in the Management of Apical Support Loss study were invited to participate in an extended, longitudinal follow-up study (extended Operations and Pelvic Muscle Training in the Management of Apical Support Loss). Potential participants who were (1) able to provide consent and (2) not in long-term care facilities were randomized 1:1 to a standardized video detailing the importance of long-term follow-up studies of pelvic floor disorders followed by the usual institutional consent process versus the usual consent process alone. Randomization, stratified by site, used randomly permuted blocks. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants who enrolled in the extended study and completed data collection events 5?years after surgery. Secondary outcomes included the proportion enrolled in the extended study, completion of follow-up at each study year, completion of data collection points, completion of in-person visits, and completion of quality of life calls. Motivation and barriers to enrollment (study-level and personal-level) and satisfaction with the study consent process were measured by questionnaire prior to recruitment into extended Operations and Pelvic Muscle Training in the Management of Apical Support Loss. Groups were compared using an intention-to-treat principle, using unadjusted Student's t-test (continuous) and chi-square or Fisher's exact (categorical) test. A sample size of 340 (170/group) was estimated to detect a 15% difference in enrollment and study completion between groups with p?

SUBMITTER: Brubaker L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7197014 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Recruitment and retention: A randomized controlled trial of video-enhanced versus standard consent processes within the E-OPTIMAL study.

Brubaker Linda L Jelovsek J Eric JE Lukacz Emily S ES Balgobin Sunil S Ballard Alicia A Weidner Alison C AC Gantz Marie G MG Whitworth Ryan R Mazloomdoost Donna D

Clinical trials (London, England) 20190726 5

<h4>Background/aims</h4>In this study, we compared two research consent techniques: a standardized video plus usual consent and usual consent alone.<h4>Methods</h4>Individuals who completed 24-month outcomes (completers) in the Operations and Pelvic Muscle Training in the Management of Apical Support Loss study were invited to participate in an extended, longitudinal follow-up study (extended Operations and Pelvic Muscle Training in the Management of Apical Support Loss). Potential participants ...[more]

PMID: 31347384

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and aimThe recruitment process in a randomized trial can be challenging. Poor recruitment can have a negative impact on the allocated budget and estimated completion date of the study and may result in an underpowered study. We aimed to perform a Study Within A Trial (SWAT) to evaluate the impact of same-day consent or delayed consent on recruitment and retention in the host trial.MethodsThis SWAT is designed as a prospective cohort design. The host trial was a randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of an intensive lifestyle modification programme in participants with peripheral arterial disease. Researchers screened the participants for inclusion and exclusion criteria. Informed consents were obtained from the participants who were willing to participate in the study on a standardized consent form. Participants were given the option to consent on the same day or to delay their consent. Following the consent, the participants were allocated to two groups (same-day consent vs. delayed consent) based on pre-determined criteria for SWAT. One hundred sixteen participants were consented to take part in the host trial. Seventy-five participants were randomized to the host trial. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants who withdrew consent at the recruitment phase. Secondary outcomes were reasons for consent withdrawal and dropout, attrition rate, and adherence with the host trial intervention.ResultsThere was a significantly lower consent-withdrawal rate in same-day consent (17.4%, n = 8/46), compared to the delayed consent group (47.1%, n = 33/70), p = 0.001. There was a significantly lower dropout rate in participants randomized following same-day consent (10.5%, n = 4/38), compared to those randomized after delayed consent (29.7%, n = 11/37), p = 0.038. Transport was the main reason mentioned for consent withdrawal and dropout. In participants randomized to the host trial intervention arm, there was a significant difference in adherence (percentage of the 12-week programme completed) between same-day consent (96.7% ± 4.9) and delayed consent participants (86.4% ± 11.2), p = 0.003, as well as number of weeks completed (mean difference = - 1.547, 95% confidence intervals (- 2.237 to - 0.85)), p = 0.02.ConclusionThis SWAT found evidence that participants who gave consent on the same day seemed to have better adherence and fewer-withdrawal and dropout rates.Swat registrationThe SWAT was registered on the Northern Ireland Network for Trials Methodology Research, SWAT 84.

Project description:IntroductionEarly phase cancer clinical trials have become increasingly complicated in terms of patient selection and trial procedures-this is reflected in the increasing length of participant information sheets (PIS). Informed consent for early phase clinical trials has been contentious due to the potential ethical issues associated with performing experimental research on a terminally ill population which has exhausted standard treatment options. Empirical studies have demonstrated significant gaps in patient understanding regarding the nature and intent of these trials. This study aims to test whether enhanced informed consent for patient education can improve patient scores on a validated questionnaire testing clinical trial comprehension.Methods and analysisThis is a randomised controlled trial that will allocate patients who are eligible to participate in one of four investigator-initiated clinical trials at the Royal Marsden Drug Development Unit to either a standard arm or an experimental arm, stratified by age and educational level. The standard arm will involve the full length trial PIS, followed by electronic or paper administration of the Quality of Informed Consent Questionnaire Parts A and B (QuIC-A and QuIC-B). The experimental arm will involve the full length trial PIS, exposure to a two-page study aid and 10 online educational videos, followed by administration of the QuIC-A and QuIC-B. The primary endpoint will be the difference (using a one-sided two-sample t-test) in the QuIC-A score, which measures objective understanding, between the standard and experimental arm. Accrual target is at least 17 patients per arm to detect an 8 point difference (80% power, alpha 0.05).Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was granted by the National Health Service Health Research Authority on 15 June 2020-IRAS Project ID 277065, Protocol Number CCR5165, REC Reference 20/EE/0155. Results will be disseminated via publication in a relevant journal.Trial registration numberNCT04407676; Pre-results.

Project description:IntroductionCommunicating complex information about haemodialysis (HD) and ensuring it is well understood remains a challenge for clinicians. Informed consent is a high-impact checkpoint in augmenting patients' decision awareness and engagement prior to HD. The aims of this study are to (1) develop a digital information interface to better equip patients in the decision-making process to undergo HD; (2) evaluate the effectiveness of the co-designed digital information interface to improve patient outcomes; and (3) evaluate an implementation strategy.Methods and analysisFirst, a co-design process involving consumers and clinicians to develop audio-visual content for an innovative digital platform. Next a two-armed, open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial will compare the digital interface to the current informed consent practice among adult HD patients (n=244). Participants will be randomly assigned to either the intervention or control group. Intervention group: Participants will be coached to an online platform that delivers a simple-to-understand animation and knowledge test questions prior to signing an electronic consent form.Control groupParticipants will be consented conventionally by a clinician and sign a paper consent form. Primary outcome is decision regret, with secondary outcomes including patient-reported experience, comprehension, anxiety, satisfaction, adherence to renal care, dialysis withdrawal, consent time and qualitative feedback. Implementation of eConsent for HD will be evaluated concurrently using the Consolidation Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) methodology.AnalysisFor the randomised controlled trial, data will be analysed using intention-to-treat statistical methods. Descriptive statistics and CFIR-based analyses will inform implementation evaluation.Ethics and disseminationHuman Research Ethics approval has been secured (Metro North Health Human Research Ethics Committee B, HREC/2022/MNHB/86890), and Dissemination will occur through partnerships with stakeholder and consumer groups, scientific meetings, publications and social media releases.Trial registration numberAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12622001354774).

Project description:BackgroundWe investigated whether, in the emergency department (ED), educational video-assisted informed consent is superior to the conventional consent process, to inform trauma patients undergoing surgery about the procedure, benefits, risks, alternatives, and postoperative care.MethodsWe conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial, with superiority study design. All trauma patients scheduled to receive trauma-related debridement surgery in the ED of Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital were included. Patients were assigned to one of two education protocols. Participants in the intervention group watched an educational video illustrating informed consent information, whereas those in the control group read an informed consent document. The primary outcome was knowledge scores and the secondary outcome was assessment of patient satisfaction. A multivariable regression model, with predefined covariates, was used to analyze differences in knowledge scores and patient satisfaction levels between the groups.ResultsA total of 142 patients were enrolled, with 70 and 72 assigned to the intervention and control groups, respectively. Mean knowledge scores were higher in the intervention (72.57 ± 16.21 (SD)) than in the control (61.67 ± 18.39) group. By multivariate analysis, the intervention group had significantly greater differences in knowledge scores (coefficient: 7.646, 95% CI: 3.381-11.911). Age, injury severity score, and baseline knowledge score significantly affected the differences in knowledge scores. Significant improvements were observed in patients' perception of statements addressing comprehension of the information provided, helpfulness of the supplied information for decision making, and satisfaction with the informed consent process. Multivariate analysis showed significant correlations between video education and patient satisfaction.ConclusionsBoth the educational approach and severity of injury may have an impact on patient understanding during the informed consent process in an emergency environment. Video-assisted informed consent may improve the understanding of surgery and satisfaction with the informed consent process for trauma patients in the ED. Institutions should develop structured methods and other strategies to better inform trauma patients, facilitate treatment decisions, and improve patient satisfaction.Trial registrationThe ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier is NCT01338480 . The date of registration was April 18, 2011 (retrospectively registered).

Dataset Information

Recruitment and retention: A randomized controlled trial of video-enhanced versus standard consent processes within the E-OPTIMAL study.

Publications

Recruitment and retention: A randomized controlled trial of video-enhanced versus standard consent processes within the E-OPTIMAL study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets