Trial reportEuropean radiology2026
Video-assisted informed consent in cardiac imaging: influence on patient experience during CT-the randomized controlled VAICICI Trial.
Trial report in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePatient compliance and comfort during cardiac computed tomography (CT) are crucial for optimal imaging outcomes. Insufficient understanding or heightened anxiety can negatively impact patient experience and potentially image quality. This study evaluates the effectiveness of video-assisted informed consent in cardiac imaging (VAICICI) in improving patient satisfaction, preparedness, and anxiety during cardiac CT. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this randomized controlled trial, 205 patients scheduled for cardiac CT were assigned to Video I (n = 67), Video II (n = 69), or Control (n = 69). Video I featured an instructional video incorporating visuals, narration, and subtitles. Video II included audio and subtitles only. All groups received a standard physician consultation. Experiences were assessed before and after cardiac CT using patient-reported outcome measures. Statistical analyses included group comparisons and multivariate analysis of anamnestic and demographic factors.
resultsVideo I and II significantly improved patient satisfaction and understanding compared to the Control (p < 0.05). Patients with Video II placed more importance on the informed consent form for understanding than the Control (p = 0.02). Satisfaction was higher in both video groups (p = 0.02), with no significant difference between them. Anxiety and nervousness levels were low and similar across groups, but notably higher among women (p = 0.008) and patients with suspected coronary artery disease (p = 0.04). Age, prior CT/MRI, and eight other baseline demographics partially predicted responses.
conclusionVAICICI improves patient satisfaction and understanding of the cardiac CT examination, with only slight variations in effectiveness across demographics, suggesting it is a valuable addition to the informed consent process. No reduction in anxiety was observed. KEY POINTS: Question Can video-assisted informed consent improve patients' understanding and reduce anxiety associated with cardiac CT examinations? Findings Video-assisted informed consent improves patient satisfaction and understanding of the cardiac CT examination, with both video formats significantly outperforming the standard consent. Clinical relevance Video-assisted informed consent improves patient satisfaction and understanding of cardiac CT, with only slight variation in effectiveness across baseline demographics, suggesting it to be of value in the consent process and promoting patient-centered imaging practices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.