The effect of detailed, video-assisted anesthesia risk education on patient anxiety and the duration of the preanesthetic interview: a randomized controlled trial.

Standard

The effect of detailed, video-assisted anesthesia risk education on patient anxiety and the duration of the preanesthetic interview: a randomized controlled trial. / Salzwedel, Cornelia; Petersen-Ewert, Corinna; Blanc, Irmgard; Koch-Gromus, Uwe; Goetz, Alwin E.; Schuster, Martin.

in: ANESTH ANALG, Jahrgang 106, Nr. 1, 1, 2008, S. 202-209.

Publikationen: SCORING: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift/ZeitungSCORING: ZeitschriftenaufsatzForschungBegutachtung

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{6303f2f69bdb4515a8906c3e80075784,
title = "The effect of detailed, video-assisted anesthesia risk education on patient anxiety and the duration of the preanesthetic interview: a randomized controlled trial.",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Video-assisted patient education during the preanesthetic clinic visit is a new intervention to increase knowledge transfer to the patient regarding anesthesia procedure and risks. However, little is known about whether video-based patient education influences patient anxiety and the duration of the preanesthetic visit. METHODS: Two hundred nine consecutive patients, who visited the anesthesia clinic before major operations, were randomly assigned to one of three groups: no-video (Group 1), video-before-interview (Group 2), and video-after-interview (Group 3). Anxiety levels were measured before and after the interview using the state trait anxiety inventory and a visual analog scale (anxiety). Patient knowledge regarding anesthesia technique, anesthesia-related risks, and patient satisfaction were assessed after the interview using standardized questionnaires. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in anxiety levels and patient satisfaction among the three groups. Patient knowledge was significantly higher in the video groups compared with the no-video group. The duration of the preanesthetic interview was significantly extended in Group 2 (video-before) (23.1 +/- 14.0 min), compared with Group 1 (no-video) (17.6 +/- 7.2 min), and Group 3 (video-after) (18.3 +/- 9.6 min). This difference was even more profound in subgroups of patients scheduled for anesthesia techniques with invasive monitoring. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that the use of a video for detailed anesthesia risk education does not change patient anxiety, but leads to a better understanding of the procedure and risks of anesthesia. When the video is shown before the preanesthetic interview, the interview is longer.",
author = "Cornelia Salzwedel and Corinna Petersen-Ewert and Irmgard Blanc and Uwe Koch-Gromus and Goetz, {Alwin E.} and Martin Schuster",
year = "2008",
language = "Deutsch",
volume = "106",
pages = "202--209",
journal = "ANESTH ANALG",
issn = "0003-2999",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - The effect of detailed, video-assisted anesthesia risk education on patient anxiety and the duration of the preanesthetic interview: a randomized controlled trial.

AU - Salzwedel, Cornelia

AU - Petersen-Ewert, Corinna

AU - Blanc, Irmgard

AU - Koch-Gromus, Uwe

AU - Goetz, Alwin E.

AU - Schuster, Martin

PY - 2008

Y1 - 2008

N2 - BACKGROUND: Video-assisted patient education during the preanesthetic clinic visit is a new intervention to increase knowledge transfer to the patient regarding anesthesia procedure and risks. However, little is known about whether video-based patient education influences patient anxiety and the duration of the preanesthetic visit. METHODS: Two hundred nine consecutive patients, who visited the anesthesia clinic before major operations, were randomly assigned to one of three groups: no-video (Group 1), video-before-interview (Group 2), and video-after-interview (Group 3). Anxiety levels were measured before and after the interview using the state trait anxiety inventory and a visual analog scale (anxiety). Patient knowledge regarding anesthesia technique, anesthesia-related risks, and patient satisfaction were assessed after the interview using standardized questionnaires. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in anxiety levels and patient satisfaction among the three groups. Patient knowledge was significantly higher in the video groups compared with the no-video group. The duration of the preanesthetic interview was significantly extended in Group 2 (video-before) (23.1 +/- 14.0 min), compared with Group 1 (no-video) (17.6 +/- 7.2 min), and Group 3 (video-after) (18.3 +/- 9.6 min). This difference was even more profound in subgroups of patients scheduled for anesthesia techniques with invasive monitoring. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that the use of a video for detailed anesthesia risk education does not change patient anxiety, but leads to a better understanding of the procedure and risks of anesthesia. When the video is shown before the preanesthetic interview, the interview is longer.

AB - BACKGROUND: Video-assisted patient education during the preanesthetic clinic visit is a new intervention to increase knowledge transfer to the patient regarding anesthesia procedure and risks. However, little is known about whether video-based patient education influences patient anxiety and the duration of the preanesthetic visit. METHODS: Two hundred nine consecutive patients, who visited the anesthesia clinic before major operations, were randomly assigned to one of three groups: no-video (Group 1), video-before-interview (Group 2), and video-after-interview (Group 3). Anxiety levels were measured before and after the interview using the state trait anxiety inventory and a visual analog scale (anxiety). Patient knowledge regarding anesthesia technique, anesthesia-related risks, and patient satisfaction were assessed after the interview using standardized questionnaires. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in anxiety levels and patient satisfaction among the three groups. Patient knowledge was significantly higher in the video groups compared with the no-video group. The duration of the preanesthetic interview was significantly extended in Group 2 (video-before) (23.1 +/- 14.0 min), compared with Group 1 (no-video) (17.6 +/- 7.2 min), and Group 3 (video-after) (18.3 +/- 9.6 min). This difference was even more profound in subgroups of patients scheduled for anesthesia techniques with invasive monitoring. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that the use of a video for detailed anesthesia risk education does not change patient anxiety, but leads to a better understanding of the procedure and risks of anesthesia. When the video is shown before the preanesthetic interview, the interview is longer.

M3 - SCORING: Zeitschriftenaufsatz

VL - 106

SP - 202

EP - 209

JO - ANESTH ANALG

JF - ANESTH ANALG

SN - 0003-2999

IS - 1

M1 - 1

ER -