Comparison of Written and Visual Patient Education Methods Before Urodynamic Studies: A Randomized Controlled Trial

This study compared the effects of written versus visual patient education methods on patient anxiety, procedural comprehension, hemodynamic parameters, and patient satisfaction before urodynamic studies.

This randomized controlled trial enrolled 148 patients scheduled for urodynamic testing between January and April 2025. Patients were randomized into four groups: Control (consent form only, n = 37), Brochure (consent form plus brochure, n = 37), Video (consent form plus video demonstration, n = 37), and AI (consent form plus AI video animation, n = 37). The primary outcome was anxiety measured using STAI. Secondary outcomes included procedural comprehension, hemodynamic parameters, and satisfaction.

Visual education methods demonstrated significantly lower anxiety scores compared to written methods (Video: 44.03 ± 4.35; Artificial Intelligence: 46.59 ± 6.53 vs. Control: 50.59 ± 6.55; Brochure: 52.41 ± 5.52; p < 0.001). Procedural comprehension was significantly superior in visual education groups across all assessed domains (p < 0.001). No significant differences in hemodynamic parameters were observed between written and visual approaches (p > 0.05). Visual education methods, particularly the Video group, yielded higher satisfaction scores (9.32 ± 1.29) and lower embarrassment scores (4.22 ± 3.76), although differences in satisfaction did not achieve statistical significance (p = 0.07). Real video demonstration showed superior performance compared to artificial intelligence-generated video animation across most measured outcomes.

Visual education methods demonstrate superior efficacy compared to written approaches in reducing anxiety and enhancing comprehension before urodynamics. Real video showed superior performance compared to AI animation, emphasizing human factors importance in patient education. These findings support routine implementation of video-based education.

This randomized controlled trial was conducted in accordance with institutional research protocols and ethical guidelines. The study protocol was registered and approved by the institutional review board prior to patient enrollment.