CClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT06115720CIAUpdated Nov 7, 2023

Consent in Anaesthesia

An interventional study of Video assisted consent in Regional Anesthesia and Patient Satisfaction, sponsored by Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust. Not yet recruiting. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-11-07.

Sponsored by Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust · Not applicable, Interventional, and Health services research

From the registry’s dates

  • Primary completion was expected by Oct 2025, 11 months ago, but the record still lists the study as not yet recruiting.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
206
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

DESIGN: Prospective randomised-controlled trial AIM: To determine whether presenting both techniques of general anaesthesia and regional anaesthesia in an unbiased manner, with video media, aids the anaesthetic consent process, compared to standard verbal consent alone.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome:

  • Participants' satisfaction regarding the anaesthetic consent process

Secondary outcomes:

  • Knowledge, attitudes and practices towards anaesthesia
  • Participants' choice of anaesthetic technique POPULATION: General adult population (>18yrs), males and females DURATION: 2 years
Read the detailed description

The main aim of this study is to determine if presenting both anaesthetic techniques of general anaesthesia (GA) and regional anaesthesia (RA) to a participant in an unbiased manner, with video media, affects the participants' satisfaction, knowledge of, and attitudes towards anaesthesia. The investigators hypothesise that using video media will improve participants' satisfaction with the anaesthetic consent process, thereby resulting in better quality informed consent.

Participant's knowledge retention, attitudes and practices towards GA and RA, measured by an knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) questionnaire based on the consent process. Participant's stated preference for anaesthetic technique (i.e. General or Regional).

Several studies have shown that video-based patient education have led to better patient comprehension and satisfaction as well as reduced patient anxiety during the consent process compared to verbal consent.

Examples The use of portable video media vs standard verbal communication in the urological consent process: a multicentre, randomised controlled, crossover trial showed that 80.7% of patients preferred portable video media (PVM) and 19.3% preferred standard video consent (SVC). PVM improves patient's understanding compared with SVC and is a more effective means of content delivery to patients in terms of overall preference and knowledge gained during the consent process.

Effect of preoperative multimedia information on perioperative anxiety in patients undergoing procedures under regional anaesthesia, showed that preoperative multimedia information reduces the anxiety of patients undergoing surgery under regional anaesthesia. This type of information is easily delivered and can benefit many patients.

Oxford Video Informed Consent Tool (OxVIC): a pilot study of informed video consent in spinal surgery and preoperative patient satisfaction concluded: "Introduction of a video consent tool was found to be a positive adjunct to traditional consenting methods. Patient-clinician consent dialogue can now be documented. A randomised controlled study to further evaluate the effects of video consent on patients' retention of information, preoperative and postoperative anxiety, patient reported outcome measures as well as length of stay may be beneficial."

During the Covid pandemic, with the need for social distancing, this is particularly useful and allows for involvement of family support for decision making by allowing sufficient time for informed consent to be made.

The aim of this study is to determine if the use of video assisted consent during the anaesthetic consent process, for both GA and RA, affects the participants' satisfaction, knowledge of, and attitudes towards, anaesthesia.

The investigators hypothesise that using video media will improve participant knowledge, understanding and satisfaction of the anaesthetic consent process, thereby resulting in better quality informed consent.

02

Conditions studied

  • Regional Anesthesia
  • Patient Satisfaction

Keywords

  • Consent
  • Patient information
  • Regional Anaesthesia
  • General Anaesthesia
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust is the lead sponsor of 79 studies on the registry; 19 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  • Presenting to pre-operative orthopaedic surgical clinic
  • Informed consent

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients \<18 years or vulnerable groups
  • Inability to communicate in English or language difficulty that requires an interpreter
  • Severe vision or hearing loss if lack of other communication channels
  • Private patients
  • Prisoners
  • Patients who reside outside the United Kingdom (home address)
  • Opt-out patients on General Practitioner register
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Health services research
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
206 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • No intervention
    Standard video verbal consent process

    The control group will undergo the standard video verbal consent process for both GA and RA for orthopaedic surgery. This will be delivered using a standardised video script that will be generated from existing certified material.

  • Experimental
    Video assisted consent process

    The intervention group will also be shown the same pre-recorded standard verbal consent, but following this will additionally be shown a specifically recorded video of the anaesthetic process for both GA and RA.

    Other: Video assisted consent

Interventions

  • OtherVideo assisted consent

    The intervention group will also be shown the same pre-recorded standard verbal consent, but following this will additionally be shown a specifically recorded video of the anaesthetic process for both GA and RA. This video will aim to communicate the same information as that found in the traditional verbal consent, using an actor undergoing an anaesthetic to provide context.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Patient satisfaction CSQ-8

    Client Satisfaction Questionnaire is a questionnaire measuring satisfaction. Response options differ from item to item, but all are based on a four-point scale. Examples include: "How satisfied are you with the amount of help you have received?" (which response options: 1 = "Quite dissatisfied", 2 = "Indifferent or mildly dissatisfied", 3 = "Mostly satisfied", 4 = "Very satisfied"; and, "Have the services you received helped you to deal more effectively with your problems?" (Which has the response options: 4 = Yes, they helped a great deal", 3 = "Yes, they helped somewhat", 2 = "No, they didn't help", 1 = "No, they seemed to make things worse". with an overall score is produced by summing all item responses. For the CSQ-8 version, scores range from 8 to 32, with higher values indicating higher satisfaction.

    Time frame: 5 -10 minutes

Secondary outcomes

  1. KAP Questionnaire

    Knowledge, attitudes and practices towards anaesthesia. Response options differ from item to item, but all are based on a five-point scale. Examples include: "How afraid are you of a sore throat?" (which response options: 1 = "Very unafraid", 2 = "Unafraid", 3 = "Neither afraid or unafraid", 4 = "Afraid", 5 = "Very Afraid"; and, "Having permanent nerve damage" (Which has the response options: 1 = "Very unafraid", 2 = "Unafraid", 3 = "Neither afraid or unafraid", 4 = "Afraid", 5 = "Very Afraid"; with an overall score is produced by summing all item responses. Higher values indicating a higher level of being afaid.

    Time frame: 5 - 10 minutes

  2. Anaesthetic choice

    Participants' preferred choice choice of anaesthetic technique: General or Regional tick box

    Time frame: 1 - 2 minutes

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

References and documents

Publications

  • Woodall NM, Cook TM. National census of airway management techniques used for anaesthesia in the UK: first phase of the Fourth National Audit Project at the Royal College of Anaesthetists. Br J Anaesth. 2011 Feb;106(2):266-71. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeq339. Epub 2010 Dec 4. PubMed 21131655 ↗
  • Sury MR, Palmer JH, Cook TM, Pandit JJ. The state of UK anaesthesia: a survey of National Health Service activity in 2013. Br J Anaesth. 2014 Oct;113(4):575-84. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeu292. Epub 2014 Aug 7. PubMed 25236896 ↗
  • O'Donnell BD, Ryan H, O'Sullivan O, Iohom G. Ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block with 20 milliliters local anesthetic mixture versus general anesthesia for upper limb trauma surgery: an observer-blinded, prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Anesth Analg. 2009 Jul;109(1):279-83. doi: 10.1213/ane.0b013e3181a3e721. PubMed 19535722 ↗
  • Galos DK, Taormina DP, Crespo A, Ding DY, Sapienza A, Jain S, Tejwani NC. Does Brachial Plexus Blockade Result in Improved Pain Scores After Distal Radius Fracture Fixation? A Randomized Trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016 May;474(5):1247-54. doi: 10.1007/s11999-016-4735-1. Epub 2016 Feb 11. PubMed 26869374 ↗
  • Mulroy MF, Larkin KL, Batra MS, Hodgson PS, Owens BD. Femoral nerve block with 0.25% or 0.5% bupivacaine improves postoperative analgesia following outpatient arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament repair. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2001 Jan-Feb;26(1):24-9. doi: 10.1053/rapm.2001.20773. PubMed 11172507 ↗
  • Williams BA, Bottegal MT, Kentor ML, Irrgang JJ, Williams JP. Rebound pain scores as a function of femoral nerve block duration after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: retrospective analysis of a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2007 May-Jun;32(3):186-92. doi: 10.1016/j.rapm.2006.10.011. PubMed 17543812 ↗
  • Bulka CM, Shotwell MS, Gupta RK, Sandberg WS, Ehrenfeld JM. Regional anesthesia, time to hospital discharge, and in-hospital mortality: a propensity score matched analysis. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2014 Sep-Oct;39(5):381-6. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000121. Erratum In: Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2015 May-Jun;40(3):297. PubMed 25025697 ↗
  • Yentis SM, Hartle AJ, Barker IR, Barker P, Bogod DG, Clutton-Brock TH, Ruck Keene A, Leifer S, Naughton A, Plunkett E. AAGBI: Consent for anaesthesia 2017: Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland. Anaesthesia. 2017 Jan;72(1):93-105. doi: 10.1111/anae.13762. PubMed 27988961 ↗
  • Winter M, Kam J, Nalavenkata S, Hardy E, Handmer M, Ainsworth H, Lee WG, Louie-Johnsun M. The use of portable video media vs standard verbal communication in the urological consent process: a multicentre, randomised controlled, crossover trial. BJU Int. 2016 Nov;118(5):823-828. doi: 10.1111/bju.13595. Epub 2016 Aug 25. PubMed 27440499 ↗
  • Armstrong AW, Alikhan A, Cheng LS, Schupp C, Kurlinkus C, Eisen DB. Portable video media for presenting informed consent and wound care instructions for skin biopsies: a randomized controlled trial. Br J Dermatol. 2010 Nov;163(5):1014-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2010.10067.x. PubMed 20977443 ↗
  • Jlala HA, French JL, Foxall GL, Hardman JG, Bedforth NM. Effect of preoperative multimedia information on perioperative anxiety in patients undergoing procedures under regional anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth. 2010 Mar;104(3):369-74. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeq002. Epub 2010 Feb 1. PubMed 20124283 ↗
  • Mawhinney G, Thakar C, Williamson V, Rothenfluh DA, Reynolds J. Oxford Video Informed Consent Tool (OxVIC): a pilot study of informed video consent in spinal surgery and preoperative patient satisfaction. BMJ Open. 2019 Jul 24;9(7):e027712. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-027712. PubMed 31345967 ↗
  • Zhang Y, Ruan X, Tang H, Yang W, Xian Z, Lu M. Video-Assisted Informed Consent for Cataract Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Ophthalmol. 2017;2017:9593631. doi: 10.1155/2017/9593631. Epub 2017 Jan 16. PubMed 28191349 ↗
  • Tipotsch-Maca SM, Varsits RM, Ginzel C, Vecsei-Marlovits PV. Effect of a multimedia-assisted informed consent procedure on the information gain, satisfaction, and anxiety of cataract surgery patients. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2016 Jan;42(1):110-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.08.019. PubMed 26948785 ↗
  • Batuyong ED, Jowett AJ, Wickramasinghe N, Beischer AD. Using multimedia to enhance the consent process for bunion correction surgery. ANZ J Surg. 2014 Apr;84(4):249-54. doi: 10.1111/ans.12534. PubMed 24812709 ↗
  • Rossi MJ, Guttmann D, MacLennan MJ, Lubowitz JH. Video informed consent improves knee arthroscopy patient comprehension. Arthroscopy. 2005 Jun;21(6):739-43. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2005.02.015. PubMed 15944633 ↗
  • Eggers C, Obliers R, Koerfer A, Thomas W, Koehle K, Hoelscher AH, Bollschweiler E. A multimedia tool for the informed consent of patients prior to gastric banding. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2007 Nov;15(11):2866-73. doi: 10.1038/oby.2007.340. PubMed 18070779 ↗
  • Bowers N, Eisenberg E, Montbriand J, Jaskolka J, Roche-Nagle G. Using a multimedia presentation to improve patient understanding and satisfaction with informed consent for minimally invasive vascular procedures. Surgeon. 2017 Feb;15(1):7-11. doi: 10.1016/j.surge.2015.09.001. Epub 2015 Oct 14. PubMed 26464072 ↗
  • Celik EC, Ekinci M, Ciftci B, Golboyu BE, Kilinc OO. Influence of visual information on consent for invasive procedures in intensive care unit. Niger J Clin Pract. 2018 May;21(5):609-613. doi: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_437_16. PubMed 29735862 ↗
  • Groves ND, Humphreys HW, Williams AJ, Jones A. Effect of informational internet web pages on patients' decision-making: randomised controlled trial regarding choice of spinal or general anaesthesia for orthopaedic surgery. Anaesthesia. 2010 Mar;65(3):277-82. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2009.06211.x. PubMed 20336817 ↗
  • Elkassabany NM, Abraham D, Huang S, Kase B, Pio F, Hume E, Israelite C, Liu J. Patient education and anesthesia choice for total knee arthroplasty. Patient Educ Couns. 2017 Sep;100(9):1709-1713. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2017.04.014. Epub 2017 Apr 29. PubMed 28487116 ↗
  • Zarnegar R, Brown MR, Henley M, Tidman V, Pathmanathan A. Patient perceptions and recall of consent for regional anaesthesia compared with consent for surgery. J R Soc Med. 2015 Nov;108(11):451-6. doi: 10.1177/0141076815604494. Epub 2015 Oct 2. PubMed 26432814 ↗
  • Salzwedel C, Petersen C, Blanc I, Koch U, Goetz AE, Schuster M. The effect of detailed, video-assisted anesthesia risk education on patient anxiety and the duration of the preanesthetic interview: a randomized controlled trial. Anesth Analg. 2008 Jan;106(1):202-9, table of contents. doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000287665.96156.72. PubMed 18165579 ↗
  • Mihalj M, Carrel T, Gregoric ID, Andereggen L, Zinn PO, Doll D, Stueber F, Gabriel RA, Urman RD, Luedi MM. Telemedicine for preoperative assessment during a COVID-19 pandemic: Recommendations for clinical care. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2020 Jun;34(2):345-351. doi: 10.1016/j.bpa.2020.05.001. Epub 2020 May 14. PubMed 32711839 ↗
  • Kickbusch IS. Health literacy: addressing the health and education divide. Health Promot Int. 2001 Sep;16(3):289-97. doi: 10.1093/heapro/16.3.289. PubMed 11509466 ↗
  • Larsen DL, Attkisson CC, Hargreaves WA, Nguyen TD. Assessment of client/patient satisfaction: development of a general scale. Eval Program Plann. 1979;2(3):197-207. doi: 10.1016/0149-7189(79)90094-6. No abstract available. PubMed 10245370 ↗
  • Rowlands G, Khazaezadeh N, Oteng-Ntim E, Seed P, Barr S, Weiss BD. Development and validation of a measure of health literacy in the UK: the newest vital sign. BMC Public Health. 2013 Feb 7;13:116. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-116. PubMed 23391329 ↗

Study documents

  • Protocol and statistical analysis plan · Oct 1, 2023

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Nov 7, 2023, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06115720
Lead sponsor
Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust
Collaborators
Imperial College London
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Nov 3, 2023
Start date
Nov 1, 2023 (estimated)
Primary completion
Oct 31, 2025 (estimated)
Completion
Oct 31, 2025 (estimated)
Last update
Nov 7, 2023

Study contacts

Boyne Bellew
Contact
boyne.bellew@nhs.net
+44(0)203 312 1248
Sam Haddad
Contact
sam.haddad@nhs.net
+44(0)203 312 1248
Boyne Bellew
principal investigator · Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust
Christopher Mullington
principal investigator · Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Nov 2023. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion