Objective: Patients hospitalized in Intensive Care Units (ICU) are critically ill. Sometimes informed consent for invasive procedures cannot be obtained from patients or relatives due to insufficient information. Methodology: Relatives of the patients who were being hospitalized in ICUs of state hospitals in 3 provinces in Eastern part of Turkey during year 2015, who were planned to undergo central venous catheter insertion, tracheostomy, and percutaneous gastroenterostomy (PGE) were asked to sign consent forms and these relatives were included in the study. The study groups were allocated as verbal (VeIG) and verbal‑visual information groups (ViIG). The next of kin who had the right for signing was included in the study. Results: Relatives of patients were interviewed for 512 invasive procedures. For the central venous catheterization, 91.6% of the VeIG (n = 166) and 97.6% of the ViIG (n = 166) accepted the central venous catheterization interventions (n = 332), for the tracheostomy, 65.3% of the VeIG (n = 49), 85.4% of the ViIG (n = 48) accepted the tracheostomy interventions (n = 97), and for the PGE, 23.8% of the VeIG (n = 42) and 48.8% of the ViIG (n = 41) accepted the PGE interventions (n = 83). A statistically significant difference was detected between VeIG and ViIG with regard to approval and refusal rates for different interventions. When approval‑refusal rates were compared with regard to education level, statistically significant difference was not detected between VeIG and ViIG with regard to approval and refusal rates. Conclusions: Using visual materials such as video in addition to verbal information provided an improvement in consent ratios regardless of education levels.Keywords: Comparative effectiveness research, informed consent, Intensive CareUnit, multimedi
