A randomized controlled trial comparing video-assisted informed consent with standard consent for Mohs micrographic surgery
Yueyue Miao, Victoria L Venning, Kylie‐Ann Mallitt, Julia E.J. Rhodes, Noah J. Isserman, Gilberto Moreno, Simon Lee, William Ryman, Gayle Fischer, Rebecca B. Saunderson
Abstract
BackgroundThere is a need for improvement in informed medical consent to address the lack of standardization and to increase patient engagement.ObjectiveTo investigate the use of a video to aid informed consent for Mohs micrographic surgery and evaluate patient understanding, satisfaction, anxiety, and time savings relative to verbal consent.MethodsA 2-armed randomized controlled trial involving 102 patients compared video-assisted consent with a control group who underwent consent in the standard verbal manner. All participants underwent questionnaire-based testing of knowledge, satisfaction, and anxiety, and the time of each consultation was measured.ResultsPatients who watched the video performed significantly better in the knowledge questionnaire compared with the control group (P = .02), were more satisfied with their understanding of the risks of Mohs micrographic surgery (P = .013), and spent less time with their physician (P = .008). Additionally, 78.4% of video group patients reported that they preferred seeing the video before speaking with their physician.LimitationsThe study design may not replicate day-to-day clinical practice.ConclusionVideo-assisted consent for Mohs micrographic surgery improves patient knowledge, leads to a better understanding of the risks, and saves physicians time without compromising patient satisfaction and anxiety levels in this study setting. There is a need for improvement in informed medical consent to address the lack of standardization and to increase patient engagement. To investigate the use of a video to aid informed consent for Mohs micrographic surgery and evaluate patient understanding, satisfaction, anxiety, and time savings relative to verbal consent. A 2-armed randomized controlled trial involving 102 patients compared video-assisted consent with a control group who underwent consent in the standard verbal manner. All participants underwent questionnaire-based testing of knowledge, satisfaction, and anxiety, and the time of each consultation was measured. Patients who watched the video performed significantly better in the knowledge questionnaire compared with the control group (P = .02), were more satisfied with their understanding of the risks of Mohs micrographic surgery (P = .013), and spent less time with their physician (P = .008). Additionally, 78.4% of video group patients reported that they preferred seeing the video before speaking with their physician. The study design may not replicate day-to-day clinical practice. Video-assisted consent for Mohs micrographic surgery improves patient knowledge, leads to a better understanding of the risks, and saves physicians time without compromising patient satisfaction and anxiety levels in this study setting.