Telemedicine networks are beginning to provide an avenue for conducting emergency medicine research, but using telemedicine to recruit participants for clinical trials has not been validated. The goal of this consent study is to determine whether patient comprehension of telemedicine-enabled research informed consent is non-inferior to standard face-to-face research informed consent.
A prospective, open-label randomized controlled trial was performed in a 60,000-visit Midwestern academic Emergency Department (ED) to test whether telemedicine-enabled research informed consent provided non-inferior comprehension compared with standard consent. This study was conducted as part of a parent clinical trial evaluating the effectiveness of oral chlorhexidine gluconate 0.12% in preventing hospital-acquired pneumonia among adult ED patients with expected hospital admission. Prior to being recruited into the study, potential participants were randomized in a 1:1 allocation ratio to consent by telemedicine versus standard face-to-face consent. Telemedicine connectivity was provided using a commercially available interface (REACH platform, Vidyo Inc., Hackensack, NJ) to an emergency physician located in another part of the ED. Comprehension of research consent (primary outcome) was measured using the modified Quality of Informed Consent (QuIC) instrument, a validated tool for measuring research informed consent comprehension. Parent trial accrual rate and qualitative survey data were secondary outcomes.
One-hundred thirty-one patients were randomized (n = 64, telemedicine), and 101 QuIC surveys were completed. Comprehension of research informed consent using telemedicine was not inferior to face-to-face consent (QuIC scores 74.4 ± 8.1 vs. 74.4 ± 6.9 on a 100-point scale, p = 0.999). Subjective understanding of consent (p=0.194) and parent trial study accrual rates (56% vs. 69%, p = 0.142) were similar.
Telemedicine is non-inferior to face-to-face consent for delivering research informed consent, with no detected differences in comprehension and patient-reported understanding. This consent study will inform design of future telemedicine-enabled clinical trials. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 August 2017.
All research outputs
#14,606,493
of 24,508,104 outputs
Outputs from Academic Emergency Medicine
#2,864
of 3,710 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,488
of 360,838 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Academic Emergency Medicine
#31
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,508,104 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,710 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.2. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 360,838 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
