A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Interactive, Multimedia Software for Patient Colonoscopy Education

Abstract

The purpose of our study was to assess the effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction (CAI) in patients having colonoscopies. We conducted a randomized, controlled trial in large, multispecialty clinic. Eighty-six patients were referred for colonoscopies. The interventions were standard education versus standard education plus CAI, and the outcome measures were anxiety, comprehension, and satisfaction. Computer-assisted instruction had no effect on patients' anxiety. The group receiving CAI demonstrated better overall comprehension (p < 0.001). However, Comprehension of certain aspects of serious complications and appropriate postsedation behavior were unaffected by educational method. Patients in the CAI group were more likely to indicate satisfaction with the amount of information provided when compared with the standard education counterparts (p = 0.001). Overall satisfaction was unaffected by educational method. Computer-assisted instruction for colonoscopy provided better comprehension and greater satisfaction with the adequacy of education than standard education. Computer-assisted instruction helps physicians meet their educational responsibilities with no decrement to the interpersonal aspects of the patient-physician relationship.

Interactive technologies and videotapes for patient education in cancer care: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials

“…The nature of the evidence The review and selection process left us with nine papers which met the inclusion criteria: three studies evaluating a videotape intervention (one from the USA [2], one from the UK [26] and one from Australia [4]), and six studies evaluating an interactive computer programme (three from the USA [8,22,25], one from Canada [27] and two from the UK [11,12]). The studies were all good-quality RCTs, with scores ranging from 7 to 5; only one study scored 4 ( Table 1).…”

“…They were directed at choosing between treatment options [12,25,27], empowering patients to manage their own care [4,8] and facilitating the consent process for recommended procedures [2,11,22,26].…”

Using a computer to teach patients about fecal occult blood screening

“…Several randomized trials have demonstrated that CAI can increase patients' knowledge about health topics. [13][14][15][16][17][18] We are aware of no studies examining whether CAI can improve CRC screening rates. We hypothesized that CAI could educate patients about FOBT screening more effectively than individual counseling sessions and thereby increase the likelihood that patients will complete the screening procedure.…”

A Computer-Based Education Intervention to Enhance Surrogates' Informed Consent for Genomics Research

“…However, no studies have specifically examined the effectiveness of such interventions on surrogates' understanding of informed consent for genomics research in the ICU. We found 9 high-quality studies [19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27] in which investigators examined a computer-based educational intervention and the outcome (understanding informed consent), but the researchers focused on procedures, a medical treatment, or non-ICU research and rarely used a surrogate. Computer-based educational interventions have been effective in enhancing understanding of the process of informed consent in procedural studies (cardiac catheterization, colonoscopy, endoscopy with parent as surrogate, and gastric banding surgery) and in a study on medical treatments (chemotherapy).…”

“…Computer-based educational interventions have been effective in enhancing understanding of the process of informed consent in procedural studies (cardiac catheterization, colonoscopy, endoscopy with parent as surrogate, and gastric banding surgery) and in a study on medical treatments (chemotherapy). [19][20][21][22][23] Additionally, 4 studies [24][25][26][27] focused on non-ICU research: 1 involved a cancer clinical trial, 1 had a sample composed of schizophrenic patients, 1 had patients' parents as surrogates in high-and low-risk clinical trials, and 1 was a genetic tissue repository study. Results were mixed.…”