Key result
Tablet-delivered cardiovascular educational videos in clinic waiting rooms increased patient motivation to improve risk-modifying behaviors compared to usual care (29.6% vs 18.7%; RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.04-2.55).
Why the study?
Waiting time is inevitable during cardiovascular care, and it was unknown whether waiting room-based cardiovascular education could complement cardiovascular care.
Does tablet-delivered cardiovascular education in the waiting room improve motivation to modify cardiovascular risk behaviors in cardiology clinic patients?
RCT (n=330)
Single-blind
2:1
Yes
Does tablet-delivered cardiovascular education in the waiting room improve motivation to modify cardiovascular risk behaviors in cardiology clinic patients?
Relative Risk: 1.63 (95% CI 1.04–2.55)
Absolute Event Rate: 29.6% vs 18.7%
Tablet-delivered cardiovascular education in cardiology clinic waiting rooms significantly increases patient motivation to improve risk-modifying behaviors and improves clinic satisfaction.
May boost motivation via waiting-room videos; leaves open effects on adherence or outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: Waiting time is inevitable during cardiovascular (CV) care. This study examines whether waiting room-based CV education could complement CV care. METHODS: A 2:1 randomised clinical trial of patients in waiting rooms of hospital cardiology clinics. Intervention participants received a series of tablet-delivered CV educational videos and were randomised 1:1 to receive another video on cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) or no extra video. Control received usual care. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants reporting high motivation to improve CV risk-modifying behaviours (physical activity, diet and blood pressure monitoring) post-clinic. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: clinic satisfaction, CV lifestyle risk factors (RFs) and confidence to perform CPR. Assessors were blinded to treatment allocation. RESULTS: Among 514 screened, 330 were randomised (n=220 intervention, n=110 control) between December 2018 and March 2020, mean age 53.8 (SD 15.2), 55.2% male. Post-clinic, more intervention participants reported high motivation to improve CV risk-modifying behaviours: 29.6% (64/216) versus 18.7% (20/107), relative risk (RR) 1.63 (95% CI 1.04 to 2.55). Intervention participants reported higher clinic satisfaction RR: 2.19 (95% CI 1.45 to 3.33). Participants that received the CPR video (n=110) reported greater confidence to perform CPR, RR 1.61 (95% CI 1.20 to 2.16). Overall, the proportion of participants reporting optimal CV RFs increased between baseline and 30-day follow-up (16.1% vs 24.8%, OR=2.44 (95% CI 1.38 to 4.49)), but there was no significant between-group difference at 30 days. CONCLUSION: CV education delivery in the waiting room is a scalable concept and may be beneficial to CV care. Larger studies could explore its impact on clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ANZCTR12618001725257.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
McIntyre et al. (2021) conducted an RCT in Cardiovascular risk (n=330). Tablet-delivered cardiovascular educational videos vs. Usual care was evaluated on Proportion of participants reporting high motivation to improve CV risk-modifying behaviours post-clinic (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.55). Tablet-delivered cardiovascular educational videos in clinic waiting rooms increased patient motivation to improve risk-modifying behaviors compared to usual care (29.6% vs 18.7%; RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.04-2.55).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: