An Educational Video's Impact on the Induction of Labor Experience
NCT ID: NCT04537260
Last Updated: 2020-09-03
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
129 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2019-10-01
2020-02-29
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Purpose: Evaluate how an educational video impacts patients' knowledge and satisfaction with the induction of labor process
Research questions:
1. Does a brief educational video improve patients' baseline knowledge of the induction of labor process when compared to patients' who receive traditional care?
2. Does a brief educational video improve patients' overall satisfaction with their delivery course when compared to patients' who received the standard care? Hypothesis: Those patients' shown a brief educational video will have a higher baseline knowledge about the induction process and higher satisfaction with their delivery course compared to patients who received the standard in-office counseling.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Patient Satisfaction During Outpatient Versus Inpatient Foley Catheter Induction of Labor
NCT02975167
Visual Aids for Induction of Labor RCT
NCT05671224
Video Education for Labor and Delivery
NCT04766099
Video Counseling: A Randomized Control Trial
NCT04300725
Effects of Systematic Cervical Exam Training on Labor and Delivery Care
NCT04421768
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Patients were screened for study enrollment during routine prenatal visits at the George Washington University Hospital. A trained research team member met with and spoke to eligible patients about the randomized study at the time of their scheduled induction of labor visit. There was an induction of labor schedule that is created monthly, which the research team members had access to and determined when eligible participants had their induction of labor visit scheduled.
Informed consent was obtained from the patient if they were interested in participating. Privacy and confidentiality were assured as approved team members were the only individuals with access to patient records and maintained strict confidentiality. All consent forms were kept in a locked cabinet and survey responses were de-identified. Patients were able to ask questions and/or opt out of the study at any time.
The research team member assessed patient's understanding of the information and participation by asking them to describe in their own words what they were consenting to. Signed informed consent were obtained prior to study enrollment.
Once a patient was enrolled, they were randomized to the control group (no intervention) or the intervention group (3-minute educational video intervention). The randomization schedule was predetermined. The enrolled participant was given a pre-randomized study envelope that contained a unique Study ID number, randomization group, and paper surveys.
The control group took the knowledge-based survey. Twenty-four to forty-eight hours after delivery, at a time convenient to the participant during the postpartum stay at GW, a research team member asked the participant to fill out a second survey, focused on satisfaction with the labor and delivery process.
The intervention group had the opportunity to watch the 3-minute educational video. The video shown to these participants is linked here: https://youtu.be/Pc9tcIV4Dm8. After watching the video, the participant was asked to take the knowledge-based survey. Twenty-four to forty-eight hours after delivery, at a time convenient to the participant during the postpartum stay at GW, a research team member asked the participant to fill out a second survey, focused on satisfaction.
If the patient ultimately chose not to participate in the study following the signing of informed consent, all their data was destroyed. All of the surveys were stored in a locked cabinet, secured. No one but the research team members had access to the collected data and none of the stored paper copies had any identifying information. The basic demographic information, as well as the outcome of the induction of labor process, was collected using the hospital's electronic medical record. Some of the information (race and ethnicity) was collected by self-report. Emails were obtained by self-report on a voluntary basis. They were only collected if patients wished to be entered into the raffle for the Amazon gift card.
Recruitment goal:
At minimum, the goal was an n= of 106 total, 53 per arm. This was powered based on an alpha of 0.05, 80% power, 10% attrition rate to accurately detect a 20% difference given 96% correct in the intervention group.
Data entry:
After enrollment and completion of study surveys, a member of the research team entered in all of the information collected into a de-identified Redcap database using the unique Study ID numbers. The research team also collected data from the patient's electronic medical record about the enrolled participant's induction of labor process, including gravity, parity, pregnancy complications, induction agents utilized, and delivery method (vaginal vs cesarean delivery). All of this data was entered into the de-identified Redcap database. Access to the participant's medical record was only available to the research team through the MFA's HIPAA compliant, password protected, firewalled electronic medical record (Allscripts) and GW hospitals' EMR (Cerner).
After the data was entered into Redcap, a second and different member of the research team re-checked the entry to ensure the answers were correctly captured into the system.
Statistical Analysis:
The investigators used specific methods to address our hypothesis: Those patients' shown a brief educational video will have a higher baseline knowledge about the induction process and higher satisfaction with their delivery course compared to patients who received the standard in-office counseling.
1. Does a brief educational video improve patients' baseline knowledge of the induction of labor process when compared to patients' who receive the traditional care?
The investigators used mean, standard deviation, and analysis via Mann-Whitney U tests.
2. Does a brief educational video improve patients' overall satisfaction with their delivery course when compared to patients' who received the standard care?
The investigators used mean, standard deviation, and analysis via Mann-Whitney U, Chi-Square, and Fisher's exact tests.
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
OTHER
QUADRUPLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Control Arm (Standard of Care)
The control group took the knowledge-based survey about induction of labor prior to meeting their provider (midwife or obstetrician) on the day of scheduled induction. Twenty-four to forty-eight hours after delivery, at a time convenient to the participant during the postpartum stay at GW, a research team member asked the participant to fill out a second survey, focused on satisfaction with the labor and delivery process.
No interventions assigned to this group
Intervention Arm (Educational video)
The intervention group had the opportunity to watch the 3-minute educational video. The video shown to these participants is linked here: https://youtu.be/Pc9tcIV4Dm8. After watching the video, the participant was asked to take the knowledge-based survey. Twenty-four to forty-eight hours after delivery, at a time convenient to the participant during the postpartum stay at GW, a research team member asked the participant to fill out a second survey, focused on satisfaction.
Educational Video
Those in the intervention arm were asked to watch the 3-minute educational video prior to the knowledge questionnaire and meeting their provider (midwife or obstetrician). The video shown to these participants is linked here: https://youtu.be/Pc9tcIV4Dm8.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Educational Video
Those in the intervention arm were asked to watch the 3-minute educational video prior to the knowledge questionnaire and meeting their provider (midwife or obstetrician). The video shown to these participants is linked here: https://youtu.be/Pc9tcIV4Dm8.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* English speaking
* Scheduled for induction of labor at the George Washington University Hospital
Exclusion Criteria
* Does not speak English
* Not scheduled for an induction of labor
18 Years
FEMALE
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
George Washington University
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.
Sara H Rahman, MD
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
Dr.
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
George Washington University Hospital
Washington D.C., District of Columbia, United States
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.
Rahman S, Kripalani S, Keegan E, Sparks A, Amdur R, Moawad G, Sheth S, Klebanoff J. An educational video's impact on the induction of labor experience: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2022 Jan;4(1):100495. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2021.100495. Epub 2021 Sep 24.
Provided Documents
Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.
Document Type: Informed Consent Form
Document Type: Study Protocol
Document Type: Statistical Analysis Plan
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
NCR191281
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.