Fujita Health University: pre-consultation video cut gastric surgery consent talks to 22.4 minutes

A research team from the Department of Surgery at Fujita Health University, Japan, working with Contrea Inc., tested whether standardized video aids help patients with gastric cancer understand information before a surgical consultation, according to news-medical.net. news-medical.netnews-medical.netnews-medical.netOpen source ↗ The team was led by Kazumitsu Suzuki and Susumu Shibasaki.

Sixty patients scheduled for gastrectomy were randomly assigned either to watch the videos before the face-to-face consultation (PVIC group) or to have the consultation first and watch the videos afterward (standard IC group). The study was published online on September 27, 2026, in Volume 18, Issue 9, of the World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.

Video format and consultation time

The videos were delivered through a web-based platform in short segments totaling about 30 minutes. They used animations, illustrations, and subtitles to explain surgical procedures, complications, postoperative recovery, and reconstruction methods. Surgeons selected the modules suited to each patient's planned operation, so the material could be tailored while the explanation stayed standardized.

Face-to-face informed consent discussions lasted an average of 22.4 minutes in the PVIC group and 35.9 minutes in the standard IC group, a reduction of about 40%. news-medical.netnews-medical.netnews-medical.netOpen source ↗

Decisional conflict

The primary outcome was the overall decisional conflict score. After the consultation it tended to be lower in the PVIC group: the mean was 13.5 versus 20.5 in the standard group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.056). Decisional conflict decreased in both groups after patients received the video and the physician's explanation.

No patients in the pre-consultation video group had high decisional conflict after the consultation, compared with 20% in the standard group, a statistically significant difference. The authors suggest that the timing of the video may matter.

According to Suzuki, the video was designed to help patients understand essential information before meeting the doctor, so that the consultation can focus on their questions and concerns. The researchers note that videos provide one-way information and cannot respond to personal concerns, so they are not intended to replace conversations with doctors. They add that larger-scale evaluations could provide more robust evidence of these effects. news-medical.netnews-medical.netnews-medical.netOpen source ↗