Evaluating the benefits of a patient information video during the informed consent process.

The study objective was to evaluate the effect of a patient information video during the informed consent process of a perinatal trial. Ninety women, between 19 and 33 weeks gestation, were randomised to receive written information about this perinatal trial and watch an information video or to receive written information only. Participants completed a questionnaire immediately after entry and 2-4 weeks later assessing knowledge of; feelings about the worth of; and willingness for future participation in the perinatal trial. When initially asked, more women who watched the video thought they would consent to the study (chi 2 = 6.3; df = 1; P = 0.01). No differences in knowledge about the perinatal trial were found initially, but 2-4 weeks later more knowledge had been retained by women who had watched the video (chi 2 = 6.7; df = 1; P = 0.01). These results suggest that a patient information video combined with an information sheet may result in greater participation in a research trial and may increase women's knowledge of a specific health problem and related research trial.

[1]  I. Tannock.  The recruitment of patients into clinical trials. , 1995, British Journal of Cancer.

[2]  H. Riecken,et al.  Informed consent to biomedical research in Veterans Administration Hospitals. , 1982, JAMA.

[3]  R. Kurtz,et al.  A randomized trial using videotape to present consent information for colonoscopy. , 1994, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[4]  M. Mattson,et al.  Participation in a clinical trial: the patients' point of view. , 1985, Controlled clinical trials.

[5]  B. Cassileth,et al.  Informed consent -- why are its goals imperfectly realized? , 1980, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  D. Ader,et al.  Information seeking and interactive videodisc preparation for third molar extraction. , 1992, Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

[7]  S. Piantadosi,et al.  Are informed consent forms that describe clinical oncology research protocols readable by most patients and their families? , 1994, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[8]  P. Steer,et al.  Reasons for declining participation in a prospective randomized trial to determine the optimum mode of delivery of the preterm breech. , 1990, Controlled clinical trials.

[9]  E. Lusk,et al.  Attitudes toward clinical trials among patients and the public. , 1982, JAMA.

[10]  Lain Chalmers.  Scientific inquiry and authoritarianism in perinatal care and education. , 1983, Birth.

[11]  N. L. Roberson.  Clinical trial participation: Viewpoints from racial/ethnic groups , 1994, Cancer.

[12]  E D Freis,et al.  Informed consent: How much does the patient understand? , 1980, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[13]  H. Dudley.  Informed consent in surgical trials. , 1984, British medical journal.

[14]  C. Spurr,et al.  Written informed consent in patients with breast cancer , 1979, Cancer.

[15]  M. Barry,et al.  Patient Reactions to a Program Designed to Facilitate Patient Participation in Treatment Decisions for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia , 1995, Medical care.

[16]  R J Lilford,et al.  Equipoise and the ethics of randomization. , 1995, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[17]  N. Lynöe,et al.  Informed consent: study of quality of information given to participants in a clinical trial. , 1991, BMJ.

[18]  H. Taub,et al.  Readability of informed consent forms for research in a Veterans Administration medical center. , 1983, JAMA.

[19]  C. Baines.  Impediments to recruitment in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study: response and resolution. , 1984, Controlled clinical trials.

[20]  P. Ganz.  Clinical trials. Concerns of the patient and the public , 1990 .

[21]  E. Mansour,et al.  Barriers to clinical trials: Part III: Knowledge and attitudes of health care providers , 1994, Cancer.

[22]  T M Grundner,et al.  On the readability of surgical consent forms. , 1980, The New England journal of medicine.

[23]  D. DeMets,et al.  How informed is informed consent?: The BHAT experience , 1981 .

[24]  Meade Cd,et al.  Consent forms: how to determine and improve their readability. , 1992 .

[25]  J. M. Powell,et al.  Decreased Circumcision Rate With Videotaped Counseling , 1986 .

[26]  A. Bowling,et al.  Volunteers or victims: patients' views of randomised cancer clinical trials. , 1995, British Journal of Cancer.

[27]  J. Lumley,et al.  A failed RCT to determine the best method of delivery for very low birth weight infants. , 1985, Controlled clinical trials.

[28]  J. Till,et al.  Why are (or are not) patients given the option to enter clinical trials? , 1987, Controlled clinical trials.

[29]  A Ohlsson,et al.  Induction of labor compared with expectant management for prelabor rupture of the membranes at term. TERMPROM Study Group. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[30]  G. Morrow,et al.  How readable are subject consent forms? , 1980, JAMA.

[31]  G. Morrow,et al.  A simple technique for increasing cancer patients' knowledge of informed consent to treatment , 1978, Cancer.

[32]  C L Soskolne,et al.  Physicians' reasons for not entering eligible patients in a randomized clinical trial of surgery for breast cancer. , 1984, The New England journal of medicine.

[33]  C. Meinert.  Clinical Trials: Design, Conduct, and Analysis , 1986 .

[34]  C. Rose,et al.  Information for cancer patients entering a clinical trial--an evaluation of an information strategy. , 1993, European journal of cancer.