Cesar Javier Zaidman
Cardiovascular Research and Prevention Center,
Argentina
Abstract Title: Evaluation of patient satisfaction in medical consultations: Clinical care vs research protocol consultations
Biography: Dr. Cesar Javier Zaidman is a cardiologist, graduated from UBA in 1987. He completed his specialization in cardiology at the Güemes Sanatorium. He worked in the Favaloro Foundation from 1990 to 2011. Since 2002, he has been involved in Clinical Research Protocols and has been the principal investigator in more than 100 clinical trials, covering different phases of research. He founded CIPREC in 2005, where he continues his work as President. In 2008 he obtained the certification of International Clinical Researcher (CPI), granted by the ACRP.
Research Interest: Hypothesis: Participants in clinical trials report a higher level of satisfaction with their involvement in a given clinical trial compared to when they attend a clinical care consultation. Objective: To evaluate the perceived level of satisfaction among individuals attending a health consultation, comparing those who attend a clinical care consultation versus those who attend a clinical trial visit. Materials and Methods: An anonymous and voluntary survey was conducted with 2,140 individuals aged between 32 and 83 years, who visited the research center between November 2023 and October 2024. Participants were asked about their levels of expectation, satisfaction, motivation/compliance, organization, and their perception of benefit. The survey was conducted either in person or through digital means. A scoring system from 1 to 4 was established. Analysis: Mean Comparison Tests to compare the means of satisfaction, expectation, motivation, and organization between clinical care consultations and protocol consultations, mean comparison tests, such as the Student’s t-test, were used. Results of Mean Comparison Tests Variable Clinical Care Mean Protocol Mean p-value Satisfaction 2.8 3.8 < 0.001 Expectation 2.6 3.2 < 0.001 Motivation 2.4 3.2 < 0.001 Organization 1.9 3.9 < 0.001 Analysis of Perception of Benefit to analyze the perception of benefit, a ch results of the Perception of Benefit Analysis i-square test was utilized. Perception of Benefit Clinical Care Protocol Individual Benefit 1.08 0.6 Mixed Benefit 0.4 2.4 Collective Benefit 0.2 0.8 Cesar J. Zaidman, MD*, Fernando P. Guerlloy, MD Cardiovascular Research and Prevention Center, Argentina inovine Scientific Meetings Page 28 June 11-12, 2025 | Zurich, Switzerland 4th International Cardiology Congress Results: The average level of expectations on a scale of 1 to 4 was 2.6 for clinical care consultations and 3.2 for protocol visits. The average level of satisfaction on a scale of 1 to 4 was 2.8 for clinical care and 3.8 for protocol. Regarding motivation, a score of 2.4 was obtained for clinical care and 3.2 for protocol. Organization was better perceived in protocol consultations (3.9) than in clinical care consultations (1.9). Participants in clinical care consultations were closer to an individual benefit perception (1.08), while those in protocol consultations leaned towards a mixed benefit (individual and collective) perception (2.4). Conclusions: In summary, the study’s results suggest that participants in protocol consultations experience higher satisfaction, expectation, motivation/compliance, and organization compared to participants in clinical care consultations. Furthermore, participants in protocol consultations perceive a greater mixed benefit (individual and collective) than those in clinical care consultations.