Abstract
Background:
Patient comprehension is an essential part of optimizing medical outcomes. It is unknown which format is most effective in delivering this information. In addition to a face-to-face conversation, a paper handout is often given as an educational supplement at the conclusion of a visit. Secondary to advances in technology and the ubiquity of the Internet, medical videos have gained popularity. The purpose of this randomized controlled trial was to determine whether the educational material format (paper handout vs video) resulted in a difference in either comprehension of the condition or satisfaction with the delivery of the information.
Methods:
Patients aged ≥18 years with a diagnosis of trigger finger were prospectively enrolled and randomized to receive either a paper handout or video link with information regarding the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of trigger finger. Survey assessments were then distributed, consisting of 7 questions related to trigger finger and 1 question related to patient satisfaction. Continuous data were compared using 2-sample t tests, and categorical data were compared with χ2 tests. Alpha was 0.05.
Results:
Seventy-one patients were enrolled, and 60 completed their survey (response rate: 85%). The video group had significantly higher comprehension scores (82% vs 71%, P = .04) and significantly higher satisfaction scores (9.4 vs 8.6, P = .02).
Conclusions:
Those who received their educational material in a video format had greater comprehension of their condition and higher satisfaction compared with those receiving a paper handout. Medical providers should consider using video formats to provide supplemental educational materials to their patients.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.