Evidence Hub

The effect of a video tutorial to improve patients’ keratoconus knowledge – a randomized controlled trial and meta-analysis of published reports

Chiara Sommer, L. Bachmann, Armin Handzic, K. Iselin, F. Sanak, O. Pfaeffli, C. Kaufmann, M. Thiel et al.

Frontiers in Ophthalmology, 2022

566 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Objective To investigate whether a video tutorial, highlighting important aspects of keratoconus provided prior to a scheduled follow-up consultation, has a specific effect on patients’ knowledge after the consultation. Methods and Analysis Single center, randomized controlled trial registered on ISRCTN registry (number ISCTN75317089, https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN75317089). Consenting eligible keratoconus patients were randomly assigned to either receive a conventional face-to-face consultation (control group) or to an additional video tutorial (interventional group) on definition, risk factors and treatment options provided prior to the consultation. The main outcome measure was the difference of knowledge assessed by a questionnaire after the consultation. Of each participant, clinical characteristics, highest educational level and medical background were obtained. We also performed a meta-analysis of published reports assessing knowledge improvement by video-based patient education. Results We assigned 22 patients to the interventional and 21 patients to the control group. Mean age was 29.0 years (SD 11.6), 8/43 (18.6%) were female and median disease duration was 2.5 years (interquartile range: 2-5years). Compared to the control group, knowledge was 12.0% (95%CI: 5.8%-18.2%; p<0.001) higher in the interventional group. Subjects with a university degree scored 6.8% (95%CI: 3.8%-13.3%; p=0.038) higher. There was no interaction between video information and university…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 566 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free