Video-mediated ConsultationNCT03374865
Is the Medium the Message?
An observational study of Video-mediated Consultation and Face to Face Consultation, run by Radboud University Medical Center at 1 site in Netherlands.
Trial summary
Digital communication media like video-interaction (cf. Skype) are increasingly being adopted in institutional environments like hospitals for physician-patient interactions. We may expect that the use of a digital medium affects these interactions in various ways and on various levels. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age
- Conditions the study is for
- Video-mediated Consultation, Face to Face Consultation
- What is being tested?
- Facetalk and Face-to-face consultation
- How many people
- 50 participants
- Where
- 1 siteNetherlands
- Study dates
- 1 Jun 2017to 1 Dec 2018
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Study population: Discharged post-operative patients from a single tertiary medical center
Who may be able to join
- Discharged post-operative patients
- Follow up consultation for pathology results
Who cannot join
- Physical examination needed
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Netherlands1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
RadboudUMC
Nijmegen
Martijn Stommel, 024 361 1111
About this study
Official title: Is the Medium the Message? A Study of the Affordances of Video-mediated Medical Consultations Compared to Traditional Consultations
Digital communication media like video-interaction (cf. Skype) are increasingly being adopted in institutional environments like hospitals for physician-patient interactions. We may expect that the use of a digital medium affects these interactions in various ways and on various levels. In video-interaction, eye contact for example is impossible due to the position of the camera, which implies interactional behavior through gaze is impaired. This may influence who speaks when, if and how the participants avoid/ solve misunderstandings, etcetera. This project makes headway in our understanding of the impact of new communication media on the role of language-in-use as a rich semiotic system, specifically in institutional interaction. This type of contextualized research reveals which communicative aspects users consider important, how they manage their institutional relationship through them and how they go about solving communication problems.
The project compares the interaction of physicians and patients in video-mediated consultations to their traditional, face-to-face counterparts on both the verbal and the nonverbal (gaze) level. The affordances of video-consultations with relevance to institutional goals and identities are analyzed through a comparison with the interaction in face-to-face consultations. The approach used is Conversation Analysis, which involves finding patterns on both the verbal and non-verbal level (in sequences, turn design, preference, etc.) in order to answer the question what goals and tasks the participants achieve and what dilemma's or problems they aim to solve in their talk. This study will provide insights in the limitations and advantages of both channels of communication. Best practices will be generated and outcomes of the analyses will be used to develop reco
Read the detailed description
Research questions This project as a whole aims to understand the affordances of video-consultations. The general research question is: What are the interactional affordances of video-consultations compared to traditional consultations with respect to the goals and tasks the participants achieve and the dilemma's or problems the participants (aim to) solve in their talk?
Methodology The project involves a comparison of face-to-face and video-mediated consultations through the lens of affordances.
Data Baseline parameters, the Big Five survey, and details on experience and affinity with video consultation and (social) media use are obtained by means of a questionnaire. The patients are offered video-consultation as an option, so all video-consultation data involve patients with a certain level of openness and willingness towards the medium. The first set of data will consist of the recordings of 25 face-to-face and 25 videoconsultations of physicians with patients who have had a cancer resection, were discharged from the hospital and have a follow-up 'visit' in which the pathology results of the resection are reported. The reason for using video consultations for this group is that the patients would optimally benefit from not having to travel to the hospital, because the patients recently underwent surgery and are still recovering. These consultations solely consist of talk (no physical examination), so video consultation is possible here. Other medical departments have already implemented video consultations for similar reasons. All surgeons are in a similar stage of their career and the patients are recorded only once during follow-up consultation after surgery. The video-consultations are conducted through "Facetalk", video-interaction software. The physicians are trained to use this software and do about 3 to 4 videoconsultations per week. The face-to-face consultations are recorded with two camera's. The video-interaction data consist of recordings of the physician's screen during the consultation and a video-recording of the physician in the physical environment (sitting at a desk), capturing the physician's body and head movement to and away from the video-interaction screen (e.g., towards a second computer screen with the patient's file). The main applicant is already acquainted with the setting through the observation of video-consultations from within the physician's office.
In addition to the video-recordings, brief surveys will be conducted with patients and physicians after the consultation to measure satisfaction with the consultation. Informed consent for the study and related education will be sought from both the patients and the surgeons. The participants will also be asked for permission to archive the videorecordings for future research on authentic communication. The recordings will be stored in a safe at the Centre for Language Studies, Radboud University. Single episodes will be saved occasionally on the researchers' computer for the benefit of the study (data session). These episodes will be removed again as soon as possible. The participants will be anonymized in the transcripts and any publication and conference presentation that may follow from this study. Anonymization is achieved through functionalities in Windows Movie Maker (drawing effect) and Audacity (tone adaptation). Rendering participant unrecognizable means that the audience (of a presentation/ readers of an article) would not be able to recognize participants without prior knowledge of the hospital, the department etc. These adaptations do not affect the value of the material because non-verbal behavior (head shakes, gestures) and the talk are still understandable in combination. It is acceptable and common in the academic domain that recordings shown at conferences and in publications are anonymized.
Before the patient is resigned from the hospital after surgery, the surgeon will ask the patient whether the patient prefers a f2f or video consultation. Then, the patient will be asked by the doctor whether the patient gives permission to be approached for participation in the study. If yes, the patient information will be mailed to the patient to read and consider at home. Permission (including signature) can be e-mailed to the researcher or given to the doctor in person prior to the consultation. After that, the doctor will also give permission and sign. It is possible at any time for the participants to withdraw from the study and have the video consultation interrupted. To withdraw from the study they should e-mail the main researcher of the project. This is explained in the patient information.
Method The analysis will be qualitative (micoanalytic) and iterative. The main method is multimodal conversation analysis. Conversation analysis has a long tradition of research based on the rendition of talk and interaction in terms of written transcripts of the audible cues. The video mediated and face-to-face interactions will be compared. This means that phenomena observed in the video-mediated consultations will be compared to equivalent actions and practices in the face-to-face consultations, both verbal and non-verbal. Relevant phenomena are likely to be the opening of the conversation (checking the technology), the design of questions (use of more lexical tokens than deixis), particular gestures, specific repair sequences due to technical trouble etc.). The analysis will be descriptive and will result in recommendations for doing videoconsulting.
All talk will be transcribed according to CA conventions . Software like ELAN may be used for the synchronization of multiple video data and for the annotation of (fragments of) the video data.
- Being tested
- Facetalk, Face-to-face consultation
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
FacetalkOther
Area of interest: communication during Facetalk consultations
Face-to-face consultationOther
Area of interest: communication during face-to-face consultations
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Video-mediated consultation | Consultations using Facetalk videocommunication software Receives: Other: Facetalk | |
| Face-to-face consultation | Traditional face-to-face consultations Receives: Other: Face-to-face consultation |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Verbal communication
Verbal communication. The main method is multimodal conversation analysis. Conversation analysis has a long tradition of research based on the rendition of talk and interaction in terms of written transcripts of the audible cues. The video-mediated and face-to-face interactions will be compared. This means that phenomena observed in the video-mediated consultations will be compared to equivalent actions and practices in the face-to-face consultations. Relevant phenomena are likely to be the opening of the conversation (checking the technology), the design of questions (use of more lexical tokens than deixis), particular gestures, specific repair sequences due to technical trouble etc.). The analysis will be descriptive.
All talk will be transcribed according to CA conventions. Software like ELAN may be used for the synchronization of multiple video data and for the annotation of (fragments of) the video data.
Measured: 10 minutes
Secondary outcomes (1)
Non-verbal communication
Body language
Measured: 10 minutes
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted15 Dec 2017
- Study start1 Jun 2017
- Primary completion1 Sep 2018 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Dec 2018 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Video-mediated ConsultationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Radboud University Medical CenterThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Radboud University Medical Center
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03374865
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2016-2822
- Status last verified
- Jun 2017
- First submitted
- 15 Jun 2017
- Last updated
- 15 Dec 2017
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 15 Dec 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Is the Medium the Message? A Study of the Affordances of Video-mediated Medical Consultations Compared to Traditional Consultations
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03374865
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2016-2822
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Radboud University Medical CenterUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Jun 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Sep 2018 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Dec 2018 (estimated)
- First posted
- 15 Dec 2017 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Digital communication media like video-interaction (cf. Skype) are increasingly being adopted in institutional environments like hospitals for physician-patient interactions. We may expect that the use of a digital medium affects these interactions in various ways and on various levels. In video-interaction, eye contact for example is impossible due to the position of the camera, which implies interactional behavior through gaze is impaired. This may influence who speaks when, if and how the participants avoid/ solve misunderstandings, etcetera. This project makes headway in our understanding of the impact of new communication media on the role of language-in-use as a rich semiotic system, specifically in institutional interaction. This type of contextualized research reveals which communicative aspects users consider important, how they manage their institutional relationship through them and how they go about solving communication problems.
The project compares the interaction of physicians and patients in video-mediated consultations to their traditional, face-to-face counterparts on both the verbal and the nonverbal (gaze) level. The affordances of video-consultations with relevance to institutional goals and identities are analyzed through a comparison with the interaction in face-to-face consultations. The approach used is Conversation Analysis, which involves finding patterns on both the verbal and non-verbal level (in sequences, turn design, preference, etc.) in order to answer the question what goals and tasks the participants achieve and what dilemma's or problems they aim to solve in their talk. This study will provide insights in the limitations and advantages of both channels of communication. Best practices will be generated and outcomes of the analyses will be used to develop reco
Detailed description
Research questions This project as a whole aims to understand the affordances of video-consultations. The general research question is: What are the interactional affordances of video-consultations compared to traditional consultations with respect to the goals and tasks the participants achieve and the dilemma's or problems the participants (aim to) solve in their talk?
Methodology The project involves a comparison of face-to-face and video-mediated consultations through the lens of affordances.
Data Baseline parameters, the Big Five survey, and details on experience and affinity with video consultation and (social) media use are obtained by means of a questionnaire. The patients are offered video-consultation as an option, so all video-consultation data involve patients with a certain level of openness and willingness towards the medium. The first set of data will consist of the recordings of 25 face-to-face and 25 videoconsultations of physicians with patients who have had a cancer resection, were discharged from the hospital and have a follow-up 'visit' in which the pathology results of the resection are reported. The reason for using video consultations for this group is that the patients would optimally benefit from not having to travel to the hospital, because the patients recently underwent surgery and are still recovering. These consultations solely consist of talk (no physical examination), so video consultation is possible here. Other medical departments have already implemented video consultations for similar reasons. All surgeons are in a similar stage of their career and the patients are recorded only once during follow-up consultation after surgery. The video-consultations are conducted through "Facetalk", video-interaction software. The physicians are trained to use this software and do about 3 to 4 videoconsultations per week. The face-to-face consultations are recorded with two camera's. The video-interaction data consist of recordings of the physician's screen during the consultation and a video-recording of the physician in the physical environment (sitting at a desk), capturing the physician's body and head movement to and away from the video-interaction screen (e.g., towards a second computer screen with the patient's file). The main applicant is already acquainted with the setting through the observation of video-consultations from within the physician's office.
In addition to the video-recordings, brief surveys will be conducted with patients and physicians after the consultation to measure satisfaction with the consultation. Informed consent for the study and related education will be sought from both the patients and the surgeons. The participants will also be asked for permission to archive the videorecordings for future research on authentic communication. The recordings will be stored in a safe at the Centre for Language Studies, Radboud University. Single episodes will be saved occasionally on the researchers' computer for the benefit of the study (data session). These episodes will be removed again as soon as possible. The participants will be anonymized in the transcripts and any publication and conference presentation that may follow from this study. Anonymization is achieved through functionalities in Windows Movie Maker (drawing effect) and Audacity (tone adaptation). Rendering participant unrecognizable means that the audience (of a presentation/ readers of an article) would not be able to recognize participants without prior knowledge of the hospital, the department etc. These adaptations do not affect the value of the material because non-verbal behavior (head shakes, gestures) and the talk are still understandable in combination. It is acceptable and common in the academic domain that recordings shown at conferences and in publications are anonymized.
Before the patient is resigned from the hospital after surgery, the surgeon will ask the patient whether the patient prefers a f2f or video consultation. Then, the patient will be asked by the doctor whether the patient gives permission to be approached for participation in the study. If yes, the patient information will be mailed to the patient to read and consider at home. Permission (including signature) can be e-mailed to the researcher or given to the doctor in person prior to the consultation. After that, the doctor will also give permission and sign. It is possible at any time for the participants to withdraw from the study and have the video consultation interrupted. To withdraw from the study they should e-mail the main researcher of the project. This is explained in the patient information.
Method The analysis will be qualitative (micoanalytic) and iterative. The main method is multimodal conversation analysis. Conversation analysis has a long tradition of research based on the rendition of talk and interaction in terms of written transcripts of the audible cues. The video mediated and face-to-face interactions will be compared. This means that phenomena observed in the video-mediated consultations will be compared to equivalent actions and practices in the face-to-face consultations, both verbal and non-verbal. Relevant phenomena are likely to be the opening of the conversation (checking the technology), the design of questions (use of more lexical tokens than deixis), particular gestures, specific repair sequences due to technical trouble etc.). The analysis will be descriptive and will result in recommendations for doing videoconsulting.
All talk will be transcribed according to CA conventions . Software like ELAN may be used for the synchronization of multiple video data and for the annotation of (fragments of) the video data.
Study design
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Video-mediated consultation | – | Other: FacetalkConsultations using Facetalk videocommunication software |
| Face-to-face consultation | – | Other: Face-to-face consultationTraditional face-to-face consultations |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Discharged post-operative patients from a single tertiary medical center
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Discharged post-operative patients
- Follow up consultation for pathology results
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Physical examination needed
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| FacetalkArea of interest: communication during Facetalk consultations | Other | Video-mediated consultation |
| Face-to-face consultationArea of interest: communication during face-to-face consultations | Other | Face-to-face consultation |
Primary outcome
Verbal communication
Time frame: 10 minutes
Verbal communication. The main method is multimodal conversation analysis. Conversation analysis has a long tradition of research based on the rendition of talk and interaction in terms of written transcripts of the audible cues. The video-mediated and face-to-face interactions will be compared. This means that phenomena observed in the video-mediated consultations will be compared to equivalent actions and practices in the face-to-face consultations. Relevant phenomena are likely to be the opening of the conversation (checking the technology), the design of questions (use of more lexical tokens than deixis), particular gestures, specific repair sequences due to technical trouble etc.). The analysis will be descriptive. All talk will be transcribed according to CA conventions. Software like ELAN may be used for the synchronization of multiple video data and for the annotation of (fragments of) the video data.
1 secondary outcome
Non-verbal communication
Time frame: 10 minutes
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 15 Dec 2017.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Video-mediated Consultation and Face to Face Consultation, run by Radboud University Medical Center at 1 site in Netherlands.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 15 Dec 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Netherlands. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Martijn Stommel (024 361 1111, Martijn.Stommel@radboudumc.nl), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Verbal communication (time frame: 10 minutes). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 15 Dec 2017; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 4 Nov 2026.