Patient Education and AI-Assisted Complaint Summaries in Endodontic Patients
7 juillet 2026 mis à jour par: Kübra Gürler, Cukurova University
The Effect of Different Patient Education Methods in Patients Presenting to an Endodontic Clinic With Toothache and the Feasibility of an AI-Assisted Complaint Summary
The goal of this randomized clinical trial is to compare the same-day effects of three standardized patient education methods in adults presenting to an endodontic clinic with toothache.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
- Does standardized verbal education improve patients' knowledge, reduce antibiotic-related misconceptions, and reduce anxiety?
- Does leaflet-based education produce comparable changes in knowledge, antibiotic-related misconceptions, and anxiety?
- Does video-based education produce comparable changes in knowledge, antibiotic-related misconceptions, and anxiety?
- Does teach-back performance differ according to the method used to deliver patient education?
- Can an AI-assisted three-sentence complaint summary be generated reliably and used as a feasible clinician-facing communication support tool?
Participants will be randomly assigned to one of three patient education groups.
In the verbal education group, participants will receive a standardized 90-second verbal explanation covering warning signs, appropriate home-care measures, avoidance of potentially harmful practices, and appropriate antibiotic use.
In the leaflet-based education group, participants will review a written leaflet containing the same core educational messages for 90 seconds.
In the video-based education group, participants will watch a short video presenting the same core educational messages for 90 seconds.
Knowledge level, antibiotic-related misconceptions, and anxiety will be assessed immediately before and immediately after the educational intervention. After education, participants will also be asked to restate the main messages in their own words using a teach-back procedure.
In addition, symptom information collected using standardized prompts will be entered into an artificial intelligence tool to generate a concise three-sentence complaint summary. The feasibility, completeness, and clinician-rated usefulness of these summaries will be evaluated as process outcomes. AI-generated summaries will not be used for diagnosis, triage, or treatment decisions.
Aperçu de l'étude
Statut
Complété
Les conditions
Type d'étude
Interventionnel
Inscription (Réel)
120
Phase
- N'est pas applicable
Contacts et emplacements
Cette section fournit les coordonnées de ceux qui mènent l'étude et des informations sur le lieu où cette étude est menée.
Lieux d'étude
-
-
Sarıçam
-
Adana, Sarıçam, Turquie (Türkiye), 01250
- Cukurova University
-
-
Critères de participation
Les chercheurs recherchent des personnes qui correspondent à une certaine description, appelée critères d'éligibilité. Certains exemples de ces critères sont l'état de santé général d'une personne ou des traitements antérieurs.
Critère d'éligibilité
Âges éligibles pour étudier
- Adulte
- Adulte plus âgé
Accepte les volontaires sains
Non
La description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Reported pain of at least 1 point on a 0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS ≥ 1) at presentation,
- Were aged 18-65 years,
- Had sufficient cognitive capacity to complete the questionnaires, and
- Provided written informed consent.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Reported no pain at presentation (NRS = 0) or presented electively/asymptomatically,
- Required immediate emergency clinical evaluation due to signs suggestive of urgent intervention (e.g., marked diffuse swelling, dysphagia, dyspnea),
- Had substantial communication or cognitive difficulties preventing completion of the measures, or
- Were repeat participants (i.e., the same patient re-entering the study).
Plan d'étude
Cette section fournit des détails sur le plan d'étude, y compris la façon dont l'étude est conçue et ce que l'étude mesure.
Comment l'étude est-elle conçue ?
Détails de conception
- Objectif principal: Recherche sur les services de santé
- Répartition: Randomisé
- Modèle interventionnel: Affectation parallèle
- Masquage: Aucun (étiquette ouverte)
Armes et Interventions
Groupe de participants / Bras |
Intervention / Traitement |
|---|---|
|
Comparateur actif: Standardized Verbal Education
Participants received a standardized 90-second verbal education session immediately after baseline assessment.
The education covered warning signs requiring urgent dental care, appropriate home-care measures, avoidance of potentially harmful practices, and the appropriate use of antibiotics for dental pain.
The content and sequence were delivered using a standardized script.
|
Participants received a standardized 90-second verbal education session immediately after baseline assessment.
The education included warning signs requiring urgent dental care, appropriate home-care measures, avoidance of potentially harmful practices, and guidance on the appropriate use of antibiotics for dental pain.
A standardized script was used to ensure consistency of content and sequence.
|
|
Expérimental: Leaflet-Based Education
Participants reviewed a written educational leaflet for 90 seconds immediately after baseline assessment.
The leaflet contained the same core messages as the verbal education, including warning signs requiring urgent dental care, appropriate home-care measures, avoidance of potentially harmful practices, and the appropriate use of antibiotics for dental pain.
|
Participants reviewed a written educational leaflet for 90 seconds immediately after baseline assessment.
The leaflet included warning signs requiring urgent dental care, appropriate home-care measures, avoidance of potentially harmful practices, and guidance on the appropriate use of antibiotics for dental pain.
The educational content was equivalent to that provided in the verbal and video groups.
|
|
Expérimental: Video-Based Education
Participants watched a 90-second educational video immediately after baseline assessment.
The video presented the same core messages as the verbal and leaflet-based education, including warning signs requiring urgent dental care, appropriate home-care measures, avoidance of potentially harmful practices, and the appropriate use of antibiotics for dental pain.
|
Participants watched a 90-second educational video immediately after baseline assessment.
The video included warning signs requiring urgent dental care, appropriate home-care measures, avoidance of potentially harmful practices, and guidance on the appropriate use of antibiotics for dental pain.
The educational content was equivalent to that provided in the verbal and leaflet-based education groups.
|
Que mesure l'étude ?
Principaux critères de jugement
Mesure des résultats |
Description de la mesure |
Délai |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Patient Knowledge Score
Délai: Immediately before the educational intervention and immediately after the educational intervention on the same day
|
Patient knowledge will be assessed using an 8-item questionnaire developed according to the standardized educational content.
Each item will be scored as 1 for a correct response and 0 for an incorrect or unsure response, yielding a total score ranging from 0 to 8. Higher scores indicate greater knowledge.
The change score will be calculated as the post-education score minus the baseline score (T1 - T0) and compared among the verbal, leaflet-based, and video-based education groups.
|
Immediately before the educational intervention and immediately after the educational intervention on the same day
|
|
Change in Antibiotic Misconception Score
Délai: Immediately before the educational intervention and immediately after the educational intervention on the same day
|
Antibiotic-related misconceptions will be assessed using a 5-item Likert-type scale.
Each item will be rated from 1 to 5, yielding a total score ranging from 5 to 25.
Higher scores indicate stronger endorsement of antibiotic-related misconceptions.
The change score will be calculated as the post-education score minus the baseline score (T1 - T0) and compared among the three education groups.
|
Immediately before the educational intervention and immediately after the educational intervention on the same day
|
|
Change in Anxiety Level
Délai: Immediately before the educational intervention and immediately after the educational intervention on the same day
|
Anxiety related to the presenting dental pain will be assessed using a numeric rating scale ranging from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates no anxiety and 10 indicates the worst imaginable anxiety.
The change score will be calculated as the post-education score minus the baseline score (T1 - T0) and compared among the verbal, leaflet-based, and video-based education groups.
|
Immediately before the educational intervention and immediately after the educational intervention on the same day
|
Mesures de résultats secondaires
Mesure des résultats |
Description de la mesure |
Délai |
|---|---|---|
|
Teach-Back Critical Elements Score
Délai: Immediately after the educational intervention on the same day
|
Immediately after the educational intervention, participants will be asked to restate the main educational messages in their own words within approximately 20-30 seconds.
Teach-back performance will be evaluated using five predefined critical elements.
Each element will be scored as present or absent, yielding a total score ranging from 0 to 5. Higher scores indicate more complete recall of the educational content.
|
Immediately after the educational intervention on the same day
|
|
Teach-Back Global Adequacy Rating
Délai: Immediately after the educational intervention on the same day
|
The overall adequacy of the participant's teach-back response will be rated on a 3-point scale ranging from 0 to 2. A score of 0 indicates an incorrect, unsafe, or markedly incomplete response; a score of 1 indicates a partially correct response with missing critical elements; and a score of 2 indicates a correct and adequate response.
|
Immediately after the educational intervention on the same day
|
|
Generability of the AI-Assisted Complaint Summary
Délai: During the same clinical visit, after collection of standardized symptom information
|
The ability to generate a concise three-sentence AI-assisted complaint summary from standardized, de-identified symptom information will be recorded as generated or not generated.
The proportion of successfully generated summaries will be calculated for all participants.
|
During the same clinical visit, after collection of standardized symptom information
|
|
Completeness of the AI-Assisted Complaint Summary
Délai: Immediately after generation of the AI-assisted complaint summary during the same clinical visit
|
The completeness of each AI-assisted complaint summary will be assessed according to the presence of five predefined symptom-related components.
The completeness score will range from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating more complete coverage of the required information.
|
Immediately after generation of the AI-assisted complaint summary during the same clinical visit
|
|
Clinician-Rated Usefulness of the AI-Assisted Complaint Summary
Délai: Immediately after review of the AI-assisted complaint summary during the same clinical visit
|
The usefulness of the AI-assisted complaint summary for structuring the clinical encounter will be rated by a single endodontist on a numeric rating scale ranging from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates not useful at all and 10 indicates extremely useful.
|
Immediately after review of the AI-assisted complaint summary during the same clinical visit
|
Collaborateurs et enquêteurs
C'est ici que vous trouverez les personnes et les organisations impliquées dans cette étude.
Parrainer
Publications et liens utiles
La personne responsable de la saisie des informations sur l'étude fournit volontairement ces publications. Il peut s'agir de tout ce qui concerne l'étude.
Dates d'enregistrement des études
Ces dates suivent la progression des dossiers d'étude et des soumissions de résultats sommaires à ClinicalTrials.gov. Les dossiers d'étude et les résultats rapportés sont examinés par la Bibliothèque nationale de médecine (NLM) pour s'assurer qu'ils répondent à des normes de contrôle de qualité spécifiques avant d'être publiés sur le site Web public.
Dates principales de l'étude
Début de l'étude (Réel)
15 décembre 2025
Achèvement primaire (Réel)
12 mars 2026
Achèvement de l'étude (Réel)
24 avril 2026
Dates d'inscription aux études
Première soumission
7 juillet 2026
Première soumission répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité
7 juillet 2026
Première publication (Réel)
13 juillet 2026
Mises à jour des dossiers d'étude
Dernière mise à jour publiée (Réel)
13 juillet 2026
Dernière mise à jour soumise répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité
7 juillet 2026
Dernière vérification
1 juillet 2026
Plus d'information
Termes liés à cette étude
Termes MeSH pertinents supplémentaires
Autres numéros d'identification d'étude
- 13.03.2026/104
Plan pour les données individuelles des participants (IPD)
Prévoyez-vous de partager les données individuelles des participants (DPI) ?
NON
Informations sur les médicaments et les dispositifs, documents d'étude
Étudie un produit pharmaceutique réglementé par la FDA américaine
Non
Étudie un produit d'appareil réglementé par la FDA américaine
Non
Ces informations ont été extraites directement du site Web clinicaltrials.gov sans aucune modification. Si vous avez des demandes de modification, de suppression ou de mise à jour des détails de votre étude, veuillez contacter register@clinicaltrials.gov. Dès qu'un changement est mis en œuvre sur clinicaltrials.gov, il sera également mis à jour automatiquement sur notre site Web .