The Problem
Every procedural practice in America obtains signed consent forms. Every practice believes this protects them. Most are wrong.
A signed form documents that a conversation happened and a signature was obtained. It does not document what was said, whether the patient understood it, or whether the explanation covered risks, alternatives, and expected outcomes in a way the patient could meaningfully process. When a malpractice claim alleges inadequate informed consent, the signed form is the beginning of the defense — not the end of it.
The Evidence
Candello — the malpractice benchmarking division of Harvard's Risk Management Foundation — maintains a database of approximately 500,000 medical professional liability cases. An analysis presented by Dr. Adam Schaffer at Candello's 2023 Annual Community Summit found that claims citing inadequate informed consent for procedures had 114% higher odds of closing with payment compared to claims without that factor. Claims citing inadequate consent for alternative treatments had 90% higher odds.
That's not a marginal increase. Inadequate informed consent more than doubles the probability of a payout.
In vascular surgery specifically, 18.5% of active US vascular surgeons were named in a malpractice suit within any two-year window. One quarter of venous and lymphatic disease malpractice cases specifically allege lack of informed consent. And only 14% of vascular patients met the threshold for adequate consent comprehension after standard verbal discussion.
A randomized controlled trial by Rossi et al. found that video-assisted consent raised patient comprehension from 65.4% to 78.5% — a 13.1 percentage point improvement — while simultaneously reducing the time the physician needed to spend on the conversation.
Candello's own 2024 For the Record report, analyzing over 65,000 cases, found that insufficient documentation of informed consent increased the odds of a case closing with payment by 80%. Their conclusion: documentation issues "more than double the odds that a case will close with an indemnity payment."
What This Means for Your Practice
The gap between signing a form and understanding a procedure is where consent-related liability lives. Video education closes that gap in two ways.
First, it improves comprehension. A patient who watches their physician explain the procedure, the risks, the alternatives, and the recovery — on their own time, with family present, as many times as they need — arrives at the consent conversation already informed. The discussion becomes confirmation, not education.
Second, it creates documentation. A video that was sent, received, and viewed is a verifiable record. It demonstrates that the practice took affirmative steps to ensure the patient understood — not just that a form was signed. That distinction matters when a claim is filed.