A randomised controlled trial to assess the impact of audiotaped consultations on the quality of informed consent in cardiac surgery

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Murday
2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. e000376
Author(s):  
Sivakami Janahiraman ◽  
Chan Yen Tay ◽  
Jie Min Lee ◽  
Wen Ling Lim ◽  
Chun Hoe Khiew ◽  
...  

ObjectivePreprocedural bowel preparation is necessary for optimal colonoscopy visualisation. However, it is challenging to achieve high-quality bowel preparation among patients scheduled for colonoscopy. This study aims to evaluate the impact of an intensive patient educational programme on the quality of bowel preparation.DesignAn accessor-blinded randomised controlled trial was carried out at the outpatient surgical clinic of a tertiary hospital. Patients were randomly assigned to the control group (received standard written and verbal instructions) or the experimental group (received an intensive and structured educational programme). All subjects completed a questionnaire before colonoscopy to assess their compliance, acceptability, and tolerability towards bowel preparation regime. Quality of bowel preparation was determined using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS).ResultsA total of 300 subjects who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were recruited. The experimental group had a significantly higher proportion of good quality bowel preparation than the control group (98.7% vs 52.3%, p<0.001). The median total BBPS score was also significantly higher in the experimental group (8 vs 5, p<0.001). Factors associated with good quality of bowel preparation included educational programme (OR: 22.79, 95% CI: 4.23 to 122.85, p<0.001), compliance to bowel cleansing agent (OR: 24.98, 95% CI 3.12 to 199.71, p<0.001), very difficult acceptability of preparation (OR: 0.11, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.38, p<0.001), tolerability towards bowel preparation (OR: 4.98, 95% CI 1.44 to 17.20, p<0.011) and hypomotility drugs (OR: 3.03, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.91, p<0.05).ConclusionAn intensive patient educational programme can significantly improve the quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy.


2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9507-9507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janette L. Vardy ◽  
Melanie Bell ◽  
Hidde van der Ploeg ◽  
Jane Turner ◽  
Michael Kabourakis ◽  
...  

BMJ ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 329 (7460) ◽  
pp. 258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moira McKendry ◽  
Helen McGloin ◽  
Debbie Saberi ◽  
Libby Caudwell ◽  
Anthony R Brady ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aidan Tan ◽  
Zet Tan ◽  
Tom Li ◽  
Ian Harris ◽  
Justine Naylor ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The impact of the SPIRIT statement on the reporting quality of RCT protocols in health research is unknown. This methodological study aimed to determine the reporting quality of published randomised controlled trial (RCT) protocols before and after the SPIRIT statement, and any association with author, trial or journal factors. Methods RCT protocols were identified by searching MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL, included if published in full-text, English language and a peer-reviewed journal, and assessed with the SPIRIT statement checklist items. Results 300 RCT protocols were retrieved; 150 from the period immediately before the SPIRIT statement and 150 from a recent period after the SPIRIT statement. 47.9% (95% CI, 46.5% to 49.3%) of checklist items were adequately reported in RCT protocols before the SPIRIT statement and 56.7% (95% CI, 54.9% to 58.5%) after the SPIRIT statement. This represents an 8.8% (95% CI, 6.6% to 11.1%; p &lt; 0.0001) mean improvement in the overall proportion of checklist items adequately reported since the SPIRIT statement. The factors associated with higher reporting quality of RCT protocols in multiple regression analysis were author expertise or experience in epidemiology or statistics, multicentre trials, longer protocol word length and publicly reported journal policy of compliance with the SPIRIT statement. Conclusions The overall reporting quality of RCT protocols has significantly improved since the SPIRIT statement, although a substantial proportion of individual checklist items remain poorly reported. Key messages Continued, concerted and coordinated efforts are required by journals, editors, reviewers and investigators to improve the completeness and transparency of RCT protocols.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document