4.2 Article

Randomized trial of a web-based tool for prolapse: impact on patient understanding and provider counseling

期刊

INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL
卷 25, 期 8, 页码 1127-1132

出版社

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s00192-014-2364-3

关键词

iPad (TM); Patient education; Patient satisfaction; Prolapse

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Effective patient/provider communication is important to ensure patient understanding, safety, and satisfaction. Our hypothesis was that interactive patient/provider counseling using a web-based tool (iPad (TM) application) would have a greater impact on patient satisfaction with understanding prolapse symptoms compared with standard counseling (SC). Women with complaints of seeing/sensing a vaginal bulge were enrolled in this randomized controlled trial. Participants completed pre- and postvisit Likert scale questionnaires on satisfaction with prolapse knowledge and related anxiety. After new patient histories and physical examinations, study participants were randomized to SC or SC with iPad (TM). Ninety participants were required to detect a 30 % difference in satisfaction with prolapse knowledge between the two groups. Ninety women were randomized to SC (n = 44) or SC with iPad (TM) (n = 46). At baseline, 47 % of women were satisfied with their understanding of bulge symptoms (50 % SC vs. 43.5 % SC with iPad (TM), p = 0.5). After counseling, 97 % of women reported increased satisfaction with understanding of bulge symptoms (p < 0.0001), with no difference between groups [42/44 (95.5 %) SC vs. 45/46 (97.8 %) SC with iPad (TM), p = 0.5]. Baseline anxiety was high: 70 % (65.9 % SC vs. 73.9 % SC with iPad (TM), p = 0.4). After counseling, anxiety decreased to 30 % (p < 0.0001), with improvement in both groups (31.8 % SC vs. 28.3 % SC with iPad (TM), p = 0.7). Counseling times were similar between groups (9.5 min., SC vs. 8.9 min., SC with iPad, p = 0.4). Interactive counseling was associated with increased patient satisfaction with understanding bulge symptoms and decreased anxiety whether a web-based tool was used or not.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据