Figure 4: Still frames from animation demonstrating ankle surgery to repair a fracture.
The Picture Superiority Effect
Much has been written about how visuals are better at helping people remember information. This is called the pictorial superiority effect (Snodgrass 1977, Maisto 1992, etc.), and indicates people are more likely to recall information presented to them in picture format than in text or verbal format.
Retaining complex medical information relies on working memory, which has limited capacity. Visual stimuli are processed more efficiently, and retained and retrieved from memory more effectively, than verbal stimuli. Due to this, visually explaining the medical record is critical in any case where a significant amount of unfamiliar information is being discussed — such as in a trial that involves medical issues.
This principle was applied for the creation of the animations for this case. For example, details in the OR note were far too complex for the jury to understand, let alone retain them.
Visual Communication Of The PI Case
Several ideas should be considered when visually communicating the medical content of this kind of PI file. Overloading cognitive perceptions and processing can negatively affect recall of critical information when a jury is learning about a case and later deliberating on it. Packaging complex concepts into digestible chunks of information improves understanding and aids recall. Repetition and capitalizing on different learning styles can enhance retention. Simplifying information and other visual approaches can optimize working memory and perceptions.
Make it vivid, make it believable. The essence of demonstrating this case was to show the details of both surgeries in a clear and realistic manner. A vivid portrayal of the key steps employed in the operative procedures were necessary to provide a true understanding of what was involved. The surgeries on both the femur and ankle bones were extensive, entailing incisions, alignment of fractured bone ends, removal of loose bone fragments and insertion of hardware.
Compare and contrast visual elements. This case included x-rays documenting the trauma findings as well as the postoperative appearance of the femur and ankle. However, lay people are typically unable to understand radiological images due to their technical nature and inherent medical content.
X-rays and other types of images (e.g. MRIs, CT scans), require specialized knowledge to interpret. Segments in the animations created for this case translate the x-rays into visual
representations that make them understandable by lay people, and support the 3D-modeled anatomical pre-op and post-op portrayals.
Make it memorable. With the exposition of voluminous information entailed in the PI file — much of it complex medical concepts that are difficult to recall, making the key issues stand out is paramount. Visual images are more memorable because they engage multiple senses and cognitive processes. Not only do they simplify complex concepts, they also create mental associations and evoke emotional responses, fostering a deeper understanding and retention of key information.
Accommodate different learning styles. People don’t all learn the same way. Different learners may require different forms of demonstrative evidence that optimize connection to their dominant neurological channels and cognitive perceptions. Using a combination of auditory, visual and kinesthetic stimulation (in the form of medical illustrations, animations, interactive media and 3D models), reinforces key points and maximizes information retention throughout the duration of a trial.
Build on the obvious. It’s important not to assume the jury perceives evidence as self-evident. Demonstratives in a medical case can clarify key issues, provide context, and reinforce arguments to ensure all litigation participants end up on the same page. Addressing issues proactively in visual format ensures case intricacies are presented clearly and compellingly to the jury, while reinforcing messages that may not be obvious to all.
How To Use Medical Animations Effectively At Trial
At trial, the use of these kinds of medical animations must be metered so that the jury is not desensitized to the information conveyed and the magnitude of the client’s loss. In this case example, the automobile collision caused the plaintiff to suffer significant injuries that required open reduction internal fixation of the fractures.
Use the full-length animation one time during the evidence. Let the main expert or treating surgeon stop, rewind, and emphasize critical parts of the animation as she explains the cause of the fracture, the need for the surgery, the process of the surgery, and what will be in the plaintiff’s thigh and ankle for the rest of the plaintiff’s life. The entire animation may be only three minutes long if played from beginning to end. But the animation loses its impact without the surgeon stopping as she sees fit to emphasize or teach a particular point. It is an excellent didactic tool and, at the end of the twenty to thirty minutes of testimony from the surgeon, the complex medical issues will have been boiled down to an illustrated teaching that is no longer in length than the average American sit-com.
On cross-examination of the opposing medical expert, use quick “reels” from the animation that the expert has to agree with. The full-length animation should not be used again during the presentation of evidence: that will come later. Use stills or short reels from the animation and have them in the “holster” ready to go at the appropriate moment on cross. This is a particularly effective method to stop a narrating expert in his tracks and get back to the items that he has to concede because they are undisputed. Make the opposing expert watch the 20 to 30 second reel, and then ask simple yes/no questions about the manner of the injury, the need for the surgery, the permanence of the hardware placement, etc. This technique serves the dual purpose of corralling the opposing expert while reminding the jury about key portions of the full-length animation they saw during the plaintiff’s case-in-chief. Stills from the animation can also be used to remind the jurors about the plaintiff’s expert testimony and to stress the magnitude of damages and permanence.
While the full-length animation should be used only once during the presentation of evidence, it can and should be used again during closing argument. This takes practice and repetition. If the animation is two minutes and 30 seconds long, the attorney should craft a portion of his closing to exactly that portion of time so that he delivers a precise argument on the magnitude of damages while having the animation running at the same time. It takes practice and repetition and refinement, but it is worth the effort. For that discrete portion of closing argument, there should a well-defined argument that has a beginning, an emotional peak, and an appeal to logic — all within the runtime of the animation. This can be done, effectively, immediately before discussing what should be filled in on the verdict form damages line.