Paper vs. eConsent: A Comparison

There are many benefits of eConsent vs. a paper-based system when it comes to your site team efficiently managing patient recruitment, maximizing retention, mitigating risk of data loss, and increasing ROI.

See a side-by-side comparison below and use it to help you evaluate a move to eConsent.

Paper eConsent
Patient Engagement Site is responsible for patient understanding the forms they are handed Patient is engaged in an interactive process through video and Q&A
Fraud Detection No audit trail and manual file system needed Complete audit trail for all signatures, initials saved in a secure digital system
IRB Review Multiple circulating paper copies that vary by IRB and country Standardized documentation on web portal for IRB review
Version Control & Protocol Amendments Many patients don’t receive Strict version control with automatic patient delivery and signature notification
Site Monitoring Monitor travels to site All data easily accessible via secure web portal
Storage Numerous binders kept in a storage facility All data is accessible and backed up on secure web portal
Patient Comprehension Limited due to language, terminology, extent of documentation Available in multiple languages via the web from any location
Status of Site Consent Forms Must call, email, visit site to confirm status of forms Online summary viewing and reporting of all consent documentation

See Our CTMS In Action

Clinical Conductor is the only Clinical Trial Management System (CTMS) that cuts out the complexity in clinical trial software with tools designed to work for clinical trials.



Related Blog Posts