ECONOMICS,EDUCATION, AND HEALTH SYSTEMS RESEARCH SECTION EDITOR RONALD D. MILLER Patient Satisfaction and Information Gain After the Preanesthetic Visit: A Comparison of Face-to-Face Interview, Brochure, and Video Stephanie A. Snyder-Ramos, MD*, Henrik Seintsch*, Bernd W. Bo ¨ ttiger, MD, DEAA*, Johann Motsch, MD*, Eike Martin, MD, FANZCA*, and Martin Bauer, MD, MPH† *Department of Anesthesiology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; and †Department of Anesthesiology, Universities of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany In this study we compared 3 methods of conducting the preanesthetic visit. We prospectively studied 197 con- secutive surgical patients who were to undergo general anesthesia. The patients were randomized to a routine preanesthetic interview, a brochure plus an interview, or a self-made documentary video plus an interview. After the preanesthetic visit, the degree of patient satis- faction and information gain was quantified by a ques- tionnaire for each method. The questions on patient sat- isfaction were assessed on a six-point scale, and those on information gain were assessed on a multiple-choice basis. The video plus interview group showed the high- est point scores (98% of the possible maximum sum point score in patient satisfaction and 93% of the maximum sum score in information gain). In contrast, the patients of the brochure plus interview group re- vealed 93% for patient satisfaction and 80% for informa- tion gain, and in the standard interview group, the cor- responding figures were 91% and 72%, respectively. The maximum sum scores in patient satisfaction and information gain were significantly different between the interview and the video groups, but not between the interview and the brochure groups. Therefore, these data suggest that the use of a documentary video to supplement a preoperative interview may enhance pa- tient satisfaction and maximize information gain. (Anesth Analg 2005;100:1753–8) T he value of a routine interview as the preanes- thetic visit and preoperative preparation tech- nique has been called into question, and an in- creasing number of studies have addressed the effectiveness of media-based interventions (1– 4). In this context, patient satisfaction and information gain are important variables in the comparison of different methods for conducting the preanesthetic visit. This is the first study to compare face-to-face inter- view, brochure plus interview, and documentary video plus interview with regard to preoperative preparation for anesthesia in elective surgical patients. For this purpose, patient satisfaction and information gain were tested (5–9) for each technique of conduct- ing the preanesthetic visit with a specially developed written questionnaire (10 –14). Methods After we received approval from the institutional eth- ics committee and informed consent from the patients, all adult patients were included who were scheduled to undergo elective surgery with general anesthesia with a single anesthesia provider and who required intubation of the trachea and mechanical ventilation during a 3-mo period in the year 2000. Patients were excluded when a postoperative stay in the intensive care unit was expected, when repeated general anes- thesia had been performed in the previous 6 mo, if the ASA classification was more than III, and when there were pronounced cognitive and/or speech barriers (if a patient was not oriented to person, time, or place or if he/she had any difficulties in speaking fluently, e.g., because of language problems, dementia, or laryngec- tomy). The study was conducted as a randomized, prospective trial. This study was supported in part by a grant from Abbott GmbH, Wiesbaden, Germany, for the costs of the video production. Accepted for publication November 23, 2004. Address correspondence and reprint requests to Stephanie A. Snyder-Ramos, MD, Department of Anesthesiology, University of Hei- delberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany. Address e-mail to stephanie_snyder-ramos@med.uni-heidelberg.de. DOI: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000153010.49776.E5 ©2005 by the International Anesthesia Research Society 0003-2999/05 Anesth Analg 2005;100:1753–8 1753