Home > Journals > Minerva Anestesiologica > Past Issues > Minerva Anestesiologica 2022 May;88(5) > Minerva Anestesiologica 2022 May;88(5):343-51

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

Publishing options
eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as
Share

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE   

Minerva Anestesiologica 2022 May;88(5):343-51

DOI: 10.23736/S0375-9393.22.15969-9

Copyright © 2022 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

A comparison of face-to-face, brochure- and video-assisted anesthesia interviews: a qualitative randomized survey study

Berthold MOSER 1, 2, 3 , Tamara NOLD 4, Lukas GASTEIGER 3, Vanessa MOLL 5, Christian KELLER 1, Winfried ZINN 4

1 Department of Anesthesiology, Schulthess Klinik, Zurich, Switzerland; 2 Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, See-Spital Horgen, Horgen, Switzerland; 3 Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria; 4 Research Group Metrik, Bermuthshain, Germany; 5 Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland



BACKGROUND: Previous studies showed mixed results for patient satisfaction by supplementing the preanesthetic assessment with written or audio-visual materials. We hypothesize that an audio-visual aid or a brochure in addition to face-to-face interview, leads to improved patient satisfaction and shortens the preanesthetic assessment duration.
METHODS: We randomly assigned 1051 patients scheduled for preanesthetic assessment to three different groups: face-to-face preanesthetic interview alone (Group 1), videos before the interview (Group 2), and brochure before the interview (Group 3). All patients were asked to complete a postinterview questionnaire assessing patient satisfaction, knowledge gain, prior experience with anesthesia, and quality of supplementary media.
RESULTS: The use of additional materials immediately before the preanesthetic interview did increase the overall patient satisfaction (F(2, 1003) = 3.10, P<0.05, ƞ2=0.006) but not the interview satisfaction (F(2, 1011) = 0.756, P>0.05) nor information gain (procedure explanations F(2, 987) = 0.400, P>0.05) or quality of answered questions (F(2, 1029) = 0.769, P>0.05). A statistically significant effect on interview satisfaction (F(13,996) = 5.15, P<0.01., ƞ2=0.063), overall satisfaction (F(13,988) = 4.25, P<0.01., ƞ2=0.053) and given explanations (F(13, 972) = 3.132, P<0.001, ƞ2=0.04) was associated with the explanation of different anesthetic techniques by the provider. No differences of response quality between the anesthesiologists was found (F(13, 1014) = 1.494, P>0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Additional information imparted in the form of an educational brochure or videos immediately before the preanesthetic assessment and interview does not lead to higher patient satisfaction.


KEY WORDS: Patient satisfaction; Interview; Audiovisual aids

top of page