Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2020
Information on early medical abortion for women using an audiovisual animation vs face-to-face consultation: A consortium randomized and quasi-randomized trial.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Reynolds-Wright John J, Belleuvre Florence, Daberius Anette, Faucher Philippe, Gemzell-Danielsson Kristina, Cameron Sharon T
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: There is some evidence that audiovisual formats can be an effective way of providing information about early medical abortion (EMA). A short animation (3 minutes) was developed about EMA in three languages that summarized the EMA process for use in the UK, France and Sweden.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare information on EMA delivered by an animated film vs a face-to-face consultation. Women requesting EMA (≤9 weeks' gestation) from abortion clinics in Edinburgh (UK), Paris (France) and Stockholm (Sweden) were recruited. The primary outcome was women's recall of prespecified key information on EMA. Secondary outcomes were acceptability of mode of information delivery, clarity and helpfulness of information rated on a Likert scale. The study was prospectively registered with clinicaltrials.gov, ID number: NCT03417362.
RESULTS: 172 women completed the study (Edinburgh = 50, Paris = 78, Stockholm = 48). There was no statistically significant difference in recall scores between the animation and standard arms in Edinburgh and Stockholm sites. However, the difference between arms at the Paris site was statistically significant (P = .007) in favor of the animation. All participants in the animation arm rated it as an acceptable way to receive information on EMA.
CONCLUSIONS: A "short" audiovisual animation can adequately and acceptably deliver key information about EMA. This intervention could be used routinely to provide standardized and high-quality information to women seeking EMA.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare information on EMA delivered by an animated film vs a face-to-face consultation. Women requesting EMA (≤9 weeks' gestation) from abortion clinics in Edinburgh (UK), Paris (France) and Stockholm (Sweden) were recruited. The primary outcome was women's recall of prespecified key information on EMA. Secondary outcomes were acceptability of mode of information delivery, clarity and helpfulness of information rated on a Likert scale. The study was prospectively registered with clinicaltrials.gov, ID number: NCT03417362.
RESULTS: 172 women completed the study (Edinburgh = 50, Paris = 78, Stockholm = 48). There was no statistically significant difference in recall scores between the animation and standard arms in Edinburgh and Stockholm sites. However, the difference between arms at the Paris site was statistically significant (P = .007) in favor of the animation. All participants in the animation arm rated it as an acceptable way to receive information on EMA.
CONCLUSIONS: A "short" audiovisual animation can adequately and acceptably deliver key information about EMA. This intervention could be used routinely to provide standardized and high-quality information to women seeking EMA.