Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
242 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2011-07-31
2013-10-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Resuscitation Decisions in the Emergency Department (ED)
NCT02575573
Brain Death Diagnosis at an Academic Tertiary Medical Care Center
NCT03984981
Telephone Triage Study
NCT00222001
Cross Checking to Reduce Adverse Events in the Emergency Department
NCT02356926
Prospective Evaluation of Computerized Physician Order Entry in the Emergency Department
NCT01444768
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
As psychological theory and associated empirical findings suggest that information structuring can be a powerful tool in improving memory recall and understanding, the question has been raised whether structuring the information conveyed during the discharge communication could also improve patients' memory of the respective content. Few researchers (Doak, Doak, Friedell, \& Meade, 1998; Ley, 1979) have suggested that structuring communications in a clinical setting could improve patients' recall. They argue that structured information would be easier to recall than nonstructured information; however, these authors did not provide strong evidence to support this hypothesis. Furthermore, structured approaches and tools may provide support for physicians in increasing communication competences and potential solutions to improve the quality of communication and prevent subsequent patient harm. To date, only a few attempts have been made to investigate whether conveying information in a structured way results in better outcomes, measured in terms of learning and recall. The power of information structuring and associated chunking mechanisms has primarily been studied in the laboratory; no previous studies have investigated its role in improving discharge information delivery. Could information structuring also improve patients' recall and understanding of discharge information? If so, how should physicians best structure information at discharge to achieve these goals? How do possible effects on patients' recall translate to better adherence to recommendations? Studying these questions experimentally in the Emergency Department (ED) would be demanding and potentially stressful for ED patients. In a first step, we therefore decided to take advantage of students as proxy patients. Various previous studies have used proxies (mostly health care professionals or family caregivers) to evaluate certain patient outcomes (such as health-related quality of life (Pickard \& Knight, 2005), functional ability (Loewenstein et al., 2001), or symptoms(Nekolaichuk et al., 1999)). To our knowledge no previous study has used students as proxies to gauge the recall performance of patients.
Prior knowledge facilitates the processing of new incoming information by providing a structure into which new information can be integrated (Brod, Werkle-Bergner, \& Shing, 2013); therefore, structured incoming information should not be recalled better than nonstructured information by individuals who can build upon prior knowledge. If there is, by contrast, no internal structure because of absent prior knowledge, externally imposed structure could yield similar benefits. Thus, the extent to which the possible superiority of a structured presentation of ED discharge information over a nonstructured presentation relates to relevant prior medical knowledge was the secondary goal of this study. Or, in other words, could the availability of relevant prior knowledge enable the receiver of information to store it efficiently, even when its presentation lacks structure? To answer this question, we recruited, besides the first-year psychology students, two additional independent populations, namely first-year medical students and third-year medical students. Specifically, the three participant groups differed notably in their knowledge of cardiac pain (first-year psychology students \< first-year medical students \< third-year medical students).
TRIAL OBJECTIBVES Primary objective First, assuming that externally imposed structure yields benefits in terms of memory performance if internal structure is unavailable, the goal of this study is to investigate whether first-year psychology students, i.e. students with little to no prior medical knowledge, who serve as surrogate patients, recall more information when it is presented in a structured way as compared to a nonstructured presentation. Second, assuming that structure should benefit mostly those individuals who cannot make use of previous knowledge to build memory chunks and to better control the experimental setup between the two parameters "structure" and "prior medical knowledge", we set out to oppose various degrees of relevant prior medical knowledge to structured and nonstructured content presentation, respectively.
Secondary objectives
1. To compare differences between the structured and nonstructured conditions in terms of participants' ratings of the comprehensibility of the physician, the structure of the dialogue, and their willingness to recommend the physician to friends and relatives.
2. To establish whether the effect of information structuring on the number of recalled items is independent from the influence from the students' current mood and level of attention.
TRIAL ENDPOINTS Primary endpoint Number of items recalled, separately for the structured and the nonstructured condition as well as for the three participating groups Secondary endpoints Visual analog scale (VAS) measures of participants' current mood, level of attention (to test for moderating effects of the students' status), and ratings of the comprehensibility of the physician, the structure of the dialogue, willingness to recommend the physician to friends and relatives.
TRIAL DESIGN AND METHODS Trial design Prospective cross-sectional multicenter trial Participating sites University of Mannheim, Germany University of Basel, Switzerland Study schedule Participants We will recruit students during regular lectures at the University of Basel, Switzerland, and Mannheim, Germany. Psychology students will receive course credit for participation. Participants being younger than 18 years will not be included because of limited ability to give informed consent.
Study Procedure The study will be conducted in each two quiet auditoriums of the Universities of Basel (for first-year psychology students and third year medical students), and Mannheim (for first year medical students). We will randomly divide participants into the structured and the nonstructured condition, respectively. At the outset, after giving informed consent, participants of both conditions will be instructed that they are about to watch a video of a physician-patient interaction, requesting them to take the perspective of the patient. After that, a video displaying an experienced emergency physician who orally presents structured content to a patient will be shown to one group. A second video displaying the same emergency physician, presenting the same content, but in a nonstructured manner, will be shown to the other group. We will then confront the students with a blank piece of paper, and we will ask them to mark everything occurring to them concerning the communication (immediate recall). Informed students will observe their peers in order to inhibit taking notes. After that, students of both conditions will be confronted with a multiple choice test that was constructed in order to measure students' medical knowledge, and five VASs in order to assess the secondary endpoints. Information about demographic variables will be collected in conclusion.
Data Analysis Primary endpoint is the recall performance of the participants expressed as the number of items remembered from the discharge communication. In a primary, un-adjusted analysis, the difference in recall performance between the two groups receiving structured and nonstructured discharge information, and the three groups with different levels of medical knowledge, as well as their interaction, will be analyzed using an analysis of variance (ANOVA). In addition, an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), which adjusts for the two VAS measures concerning students' status, will be performed. Non-parametric Mann-Whitney tests will be performed to probe for inter- and intragroup differences in medical knowledge of first-year psychology students, first-year medical students, and third-year medical students. A t-test analysis will be used to compare differences between the structured and non-structured conditions in terms of participants' VAS ratings of the comprehensibility of the physician, the structure of the dialogue, and willingness to recommend the physician to friends and relatives. All tests will be performed using a significance level α = 0.05.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
first year psychology_structured
First year psychology students who watched the video where the physician gives structured information to the patient
Information structuring
Students were independently shown one of two videos in which the same physician conveyed the identical 28 items of information to an older patient (played by an actor) in either structured or non-structured form
First year psychology_non-structured
First year psychology students who watched the video where the physician gives non-structured information to the patient
no information structuring
Students were independently shown one of two videos in which the same physician conveyed the identical 28 items of information to an older patient (played by an actor) in either structured or non-structured form
First year medical_structured
First year medical students who watched the video where the physician gives structured information to the patient
Information structuring
Students were independently shown one of two videos in which the same physician conveyed the identical 28 items of information to an older patient (played by an actor) in either structured or non-structured form
First year mediclal_non-structured
First year medical students who watched the video where the physician gives non-structured information to the patient
no information structuring
Students were independently shown one of two videos in which the same physician conveyed the identical 28 items of information to an older patient (played by an actor) in either structured or non-structured form
Third year medical_structured
Third year medical students who watched the video where the physician gives structured information to the patient
Information structuring
Students were independently shown one of two videos in which the same physician conveyed the identical 28 items of information to an older patient (played by an actor) in either structured or non-structured form
Third year medical_non-structured
Third year medical students who watched the video where the physician gives non-structured information to the patient
no information structuring
Students were independently shown one of two videos in which the same physician conveyed the identical 28 items of information to an older patient (played by an actor) in either structured or non-structured form
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Information structuring
Students were independently shown one of two videos in which the same physician conveyed the identical 28 items of information to an older patient (played by an actor) in either structured or non-structured form
no information structuring
Students were independently shown one of two videos in which the same physician conveyed the identical 28 items of information to an older patient (played by an actor) in either structured or non-structured form
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion criteria Participants being younger than 18 years will not be included because of limited ability to give informed consent.
18 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Selina Ackermann, M.Sc.
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
Basel University Hospital
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University Hospital
Basel, , Switzerland
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Brod G, Werkle-Bergner M, Shing YL. The influence of prior knowledge on memory: a developmental cognitive neuroscience perspective. Front Behav Neurosci. 2013 Oct 8;7:139. doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2013.00139.
Chau I, Korb-Savoldelli V, Trinquart L, Caruba T, Prognon P, Durieux P, Piketty C, Sabatier B. Knowledge of oral drug treatment in immunocompromised patients on hospital discharge. Swiss Med Wkly. 2011 Jun 24;141:w13204. doi: 10.4414/smw.2011.13204. eCollection 2011.
Hastings SN, Barrett A, Weinberger M, Oddone EZ, Ragsdale L, Hocker M, Schmader KE. Older patients' understanding of emergency department discharge information and its relationship with adverse outcomes. J Patient Saf. 2011 Mar;7(1):19-25. doi: 10.1097/PTS.0b013e31820c7678.
Isaacman DJ, Purvis K, Gyuro J, Anderson Y, Smith D. Standardized instructions: do they improve communication of discharge information from the emergency department? Pediatrics. 1992 Jun;89(6 Pt 2):1204-8.
Loewenstein DA, Arguelles S, Bravo M, Freeman RQ, Arguelles T, Acevedo A, Eisdorfer C. Caregivers' judgments of the functional abilities of the Alzheimer's disease patient: a comparison of proxy reports and objective measures. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2001 Mar;56(2):P78-84. doi: 10.1093/geronb/56.2.p78.
Nekolaichuk CL, Bruera E, Spachynski K, MacEachern T, Hanson J, Maguire TO. A comparison of patient and proxy symptom assessments in advanced cancer patients. Palliat Med. 1999 Jul;13(4):311-23. doi: 10.1191/026921699675854885.
Pickard AS, Knight SJ. Proxy evaluation of health-related quality of life: a conceptual framework for understanding multiple proxy perspectives. Med Care. 2005 May;43(5):493-9. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000160419.27642.a8.
Sanderson BK, Thompson J, Brown TM, Tucker MJ, Bittner V. Assessing patient recall of discharge instructions for acute myocardial infarction. J Healthc Qual. 2009 Nov-Dec;31(6):25-33; quiz 34. doi: 10.1111/j.1945-1474.2009.00052.x.
Ackermann S, Heierle A, Bingisser MB, Hertwig R, Padiyath R, Nickel CH, Langewitz W, Bingisser R. Discharge Communication in Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department With Chest Pain: Defining the Ideal Content. Health Commun. 2016;31(5):557-65. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2014.979115. Epub 2015 Oct 26.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
CR13I3_140651
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.