Consent in Anaesthesia

Patient Satisfaction Clinical Trial

— CIA  

Official title:

CIA: Consent in Anaesthesia, Prospective Randomised-controlled Trial

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Not yet recruiting

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT06115720
• Other study ID #: 305199
• Secondary ID: 23SM8319
• Status: Not yet recruiting
• Phase: N/A
• Start date: November 1, 2023
• Est. completion date: October 31, 2025

Study information

• Verified date: November 2023
• Source: Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust
• Contact: Boyne Bellew
• Phone: +44(0)203 312 1248
• Email: boyne.bellew[@]nhs.net
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

DESIGN: Prospective randomised-controlled trial AIM: To determine whether presenting both techniques of general anaesthesia and regional anaesthesia in an unbiased manner, with video media, aids the anaesthetic consent process, compared to standard verbal consent alone.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome:

• Participants' satisfaction regarding the anaesthetic consent process

Secondary outcomes:

• Knowledge, attitudes and practices towards anaesthesia

• Participants' choice of anaesthetic technique POPULATION: General adult population (>18yrs), males and females DURATION: 2 years

Description:

The main aim of this study is to determine if presenting both anaesthetic techniques of general anaesthesia (GA) and regional anaesthesia (RA) to a participant in an unbiased manner, with video media, affects the participants' satisfaction, knowledge of, and attitudes towards anaesthesia. The investigators hypothesise that using video media will improve participants' satisfaction with the anaesthetic consent process, thereby resulting in better quality informed consent.

Participant's knowledge retention, attitudes and practices towards GA and RA, measured by an knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) questionnaire based on the consent process. Participant's stated preference for anaesthetic technique (i.e. General or Regional).

Several studies have shown that video-based patient education have led to better patient comprehension and satisfaction as well as reduced patient anxiety during the consent process compared to verbal consent.

Examples The use of portable video media vs standard verbal communication in the urological consent process: a multicentre, randomised controlled, crossover trial showed that 80.7% of patients preferred portable video media (PVM) and 19.3% preferred standard video consent (SVC). PVM improves patient's understanding compared with SVC and is a more effective means of content delivery to patients in terms of overall preference and knowledge gained during the consent process.

Effect of preoperative multimedia information on perioperative anxiety in patients undergoing procedures under regional anaesthesia, showed that preoperative multimedia information reduces the anxiety of patients undergoing surgery under regional anaesthesia. This type of information is easily delivered and can benefit many patients.

Oxford Video Informed Consent Tool (OxVIC): a pilot study of informed video consent in spinal surgery and preoperative patient satisfaction concluded: "Introduction of a video consent tool was found to be a positive adjunct to traditional consenting methods. Patient-clinician consent dialogue can now be documented. A randomised controlled study to further evaluate the effects of video consent on patients' retention of information, preoperative and postoperative anxiety, patient reported outcome measures as well as length of stay may be beneficial."

During the Covid pandemic, with the need for social distancing, this is particularly useful and allows for involvement of family support for decision making by allowing sufficient time for informed consent to be made.

The aim of this study is to determine if the use of video assisted consent during the anaesthetic consent process, for both GA and RA, affects the participants' satisfaction, knowledge of, and attitudes towards, anaesthesia.

The investigators hypothesise that using video media will improve participant knowledge, understanding and satisfaction of the anaesthetic consent process, thereby resulting in better quality informed consent.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Not yet recruiting
• Enrollment: 206
• Est. completion date: October 31, 2025
• Est. primary completion date: October 31, 2025
• Accepts healthy volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Presenting to pre-operative orthopaedic surgical clinic

• Informed consent

Exclusion Criteria:

• Patients <18 years or vulnerable groups

• Inability to communicate in English or language difficulty that requires an interpreter

• Severe vision or hearing loss if lack of other communication channels

• Private patients

• Prisoners

• Patients who reside outside the United Kingdom (home address)

• Opt-out patients on General Practitioner register

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Patient Satisfaction
• Regional Anesthesia

Intervention

Other:
• Video assisted consent
The intervention group will also be shown the same pre-recorded standard verbal consent, but following this will additionally be shown a specifically recorded video of the anaesthetic process for both GA and RA. This video will aim to communicate the same information as that found in the traditional verbal consent, using an actor undergoing an anaesthetic to provide context.

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
n/a

Sponsors (2)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust	Imperial College London

References & Publications (27)

Armstrong AW, Alikhan A, Cheng LS, Schupp C, Kurlinkus C, Eisen DB. Portable video media for presenting informed consent and wound care instructions for skin biopsies: a randomized controlled trial. Br J Dermatol. 2010 Nov;163(5):1014-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2010.10067.x. — View Citation

Batuyong ED, Jowett AJ, Wickramasinghe N, Beischer AD. Using multimedia to enhance the consent process for bunion correction surgery. ANZ J Surg. 2014 Apr;84(4):249-54. doi: 10.1111/ans.12534. — View Citation

Bowers N, Eisenberg E, Montbriand J, Jaskolka J, Roche-Nagle G. Using a multimedia presentation to improve patient understanding and satisfaction with informed consent for minimally invasive vascular procedures. Surgeon. 2017 Feb;15(1):7-11. doi: 10.1016/j.surge.2015.09.001. Epub 2015 Oct 14. — View Citation

Bulka CM, Shotwell MS, Gupta RK, Sandberg WS, Ehrenfeld JM. Regional anesthesia, time to hospital discharge, and in-hospital mortality: a propensity score matched analysis. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2014 Sep-Oct;39(5):381-6. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000121. Erratum In: Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2015 May-Jun;40(3):297. — View Citation

Celik EC, Ekinci M, Ciftci B, Golboyu BE, Kilinc OO. Influence of visual information on consent for invasive procedures in intensive care unit. Niger J Clin Pract. 2018 May;21(5):609-613. doi: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_437_16. — View Citation

Eggers C, Obliers R, Koerfer A, Thomas W, Koehle K, Hoelscher AH, Bollschweiler E. A multimedia tool for the informed consent of patients prior to gastric banding. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2007 Nov;15(11):2866-73. doi: 10.1038/oby.2007.340. — View Citation

Elkassabany NM, Abraham D, Huang S, Kase B, Pio F, Hume E, Israelite C, Liu J. Patient education and anesthesia choice for total knee arthroplasty. Patient Educ Couns. 2017 Sep;100(9):1709-1713. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2017.04.014. Epub 2017 Apr 29. — View Citation

Galos DK, Taormina DP, Crespo A, Ding DY, Sapienza A, Jain S, Tejwani NC. Does Brachial Plexus Blockade Result in Improved Pain Scores After Distal Radius Fracture Fixation? A Randomized Trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016 May;474(5):1247-54. doi: 10.1007/s11999-016-4735-1. Epub 2016 Feb 11. — View Citation

Groves ND, Humphreys HW, Williams AJ, Jones A. Effect of informational internet web pages on patients' decision-making: randomised controlled trial regarding choice of spinal or general anaesthesia for orthopaedic surgery. Anaesthesia. 2010 Mar;65(3):277-82. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2009.06211.x. — View Citation

Jlala HA, French JL, Foxall GL, Hardman JG, Bedforth NM. Effect of preoperative multimedia information on perioperative anxiety in patients undergoing procedures under regional anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth. 2010 Mar;104(3):369-74. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeq002. Epub 2010 Feb 1. — View Citation

Kickbusch IS. Health literacy: addressing the health and education divide. Health Promot Int. 2001 Sep;16(3):289-97. doi: 10.1093/heapro/16.3.289. — View Citation

Larsen DL, Attkisson CC, Hargreaves WA, Nguyen TD. Assessment of client/patient satisfaction: development of a general scale. Eval Program Plann. 1979;2(3):197-207. doi: 10.1016/0149-7189(79)90094-6. No abstract available. — View Citation

Mawhinney G, Thakar C, Williamson V, Rothenfluh DA, Reynolds J. Oxford Video Informed Consent Tool (OxVIC): a pilot study of informed video consent in spinal surgery and preoperative patient satisfaction. BMJ Open. 2019 Jul 24;9(7):e027712. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-027712. — View Citation

Mihalj M, Carrel T, Gregoric ID, Andereggen L, Zinn PO, Doll D, Stueber F, Gabriel RA, Urman RD, Luedi MM. Telemedicine for preoperative assessment during a COVID-19 pandemic: Recommendations for clinical care. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2020 Jun;34(2):345-351. doi: 10.1016/j.bpa.2020.05.001. Epub 2020 May 14. — View Citation

Mulroy MF, Larkin KL, Batra MS, Hodgson PS, Owens BD. Femoral nerve block with 0.25% or 0.5% bupivacaine improves postoperative analgesia following outpatient arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament repair. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2001 Jan-Feb;26(1):24-9. doi: 10.1053/rapm.2001.20773. — View Citation

O'Donnell BD, Ryan H, O'Sullivan O, Iohom G. Ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block with 20 milliliters local anesthetic mixture versus general anesthesia for upper limb trauma surgery: an observer-blinded, prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Anesth Analg. 2009 Jul;109(1):279-83. doi: 10.1213/ane.0b013e3181a3e721. — View Citation

Rossi MJ, Guttmann D, MacLennan MJ, Lubowitz JH. Video informed consent improves knee arthroscopy patient comprehension. Arthroscopy. 2005 Jun;21(6):739-43. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2005.02.015. — View Citation

Rowlands G, Khazaezadeh N, Oteng-Ntim E, Seed P, Barr S, Weiss BD. Development and validation of a measure of health literacy in the UK: the newest vital sign. BMC Public Health. 2013 Feb 7;13:116. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-116. — View Citation

Salzwedel C, Petersen C, Blanc I, Koch U, Goetz AE, Schuster M. The effect of detailed, video-assisted anesthesia risk education on patient anxiety and the duration of the preanesthetic interview: a randomized controlled trial. Anesth Analg. 2008 Jan;106(1):202-9, table of contents. doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000287665.96156.72. — View Citation

Sury MR, Palmer JH, Cook TM, Pandit JJ. The state of UK anaesthesia: a survey of National Health Service activity in 2013. Br J Anaesth. 2014 Oct;113(4):575-84. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeu292. Epub 2014 Aug 7. — View Citation

Tipotsch-Maca SM, Varsits RM, Ginzel C, Vecsei-Marlovits PV. Effect of a multimedia-assisted informed consent procedure on the information gain, satisfaction, and anxiety of cataract surgery patients. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2016 Jan;42(1):110-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.08.019. — View Citation

Williams BA, Bottegal MT, Kentor ML, Irrgang JJ, Williams JP. Rebound pain scores as a function of femoral nerve block duration after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: retrospective analysis of a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2007 May-Jun;32(3):186-92. doi: 10.1016/j.rapm.2006.10.011. — View Citation

Winter M, Kam J, Nalavenkata S, Hardy E, Handmer M, Ainsworth H, Lee WG, Louie-Johnsun M. The use of portable video media vs standard verbal communication in the urological consent process: a multicentre, randomised controlled, crossover trial. BJU Int. 2016 Nov;118(5):823-828. doi: 10.1111/bju.13595. Epub 2016 Aug 25. — View Citation

Woodall NM, Cook TM. National census of airway management techniques used for anaesthesia in the UK: first phase of the Fourth National Audit Project at the Royal College of Anaesthetists. Br J Anaesth. 2011 Feb;106(2):266-71. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeq339. Epub 2010 Dec 4. — View Citation

Yentis SM, Hartle AJ, Barker IR, Barker P, Bogod DG, Clutton-Brock TH, Ruck Keene A, Leifer S, Naughton A, Plunkett E. AAGBI: Consent for anaesthesia 2017: Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland. Anaesthesia. 2017 Jan;72(1):93-105. doi: 10.1111/anae.13762. — View Citation

Zarnegar R, Brown MR, Henley M, Tidman V, Pathmanathan A. Patient perceptions and recall of consent for regional anaesthesia compared with consent for surgery. J R Soc Med. 2015 Nov;108(11):451-6. doi: 10.1177/0141076815604494. Epub 2015 Oct 2. — View Citation

Zhang Y, Ruan X, Tang H, Yang W, Xian Z, Lu M. Video-Assisted Informed Consent for Cataract Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Ophthalmol. 2017;2017:9593631. doi: 10.1155/2017/9593631. Epub 2017 Jan 16. — View Citation

* Note: There are 27 references in all — Click here to view all references

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Patient satisfaction CSQ-8	Client Satisfaction Questionnaire is a questionnaire measuring satisfaction. Response options differ from item to item, but all are based on a four-point scale. Examples include: "How satisfied are you with the amount of help you have received?" (which response options: 1 = "Quite dissatisfied", 2 = "Indifferent or mildly dissatisfied", 3 = "Mostly satisfied", 4 = "Very satisfied"; and, "Have the services you received helped you to deal more effectively with your problems?" (Which has the response options: 4 = Yes, they helped a great deal", 3 = "Yes, they helped somewhat", 2 = "No, they didn't help", 1 = "No, they seemed to make things worse". with an overall score is produced by summing all item responses. For the CSQ-8 version, scores range from 8 to 32, with higher values indicating higher satisfaction.	5 -10 minutes
Secondary	KAP Questionnaire	Knowledge, attitudes and practices towards anaesthesia. Response options differ from item to item, but all are based on a five-point scale. Examples include: "How afraid are you of a sore throat?" (which response options: 1 = "Very unafraid", 2 = "Unafraid", 3 = "Neither afraid or unafraid", 4 = "Afraid", 5 = "Very Afraid"; and, "Having permanent nerve damage" (Which has the response options: 1 = "Very unafraid", 2 = "Unafraid", 3 = "Neither afraid or unafraid", 4 = "Afraid", 5 = "Very Afraid"; with an overall score is produced by summing all item responses. Higher values indicating a higher level of being afaid.	5 - 10 minutes
Secondary	Anaesthetic choice	Participants' preferred choice choice of anaesthetic technique: General or Regional tick box	1 - 2 minutes