Back to work
Design LeadResearch LeadGenesis MedTechJuly 2025 - Aug. 2025

Genesis MedTech AI-Assisted Surgical Video Platform

Genesis MedTech is a global medical device company serving 400+ U.S. hospitals. Partnering with 2 PMs and a team of 6 developers, I designed an all-in-one platform that lets surgeons upload and edit operative videos with AI assistance — reaching 85% surgeon satisfaction on upload and a 68% editing retention rate at MVP (vs. 60% benchmark).

The Solution

Uploading Process

A guided upload with AI-prefilled surgery descriptions and automated flagging of patient-identifiable frames.

Uploading Process

AI-assisted editor

AI-assisted editor that surfaces unusable and sensitive clips for surgeon review before publishing.

AI-assisted editor

The Problem

Leading surgeons publish operative videos on platforms like YouTube — to reflect on their own procedures and help younger doctors learn. But mainstream platforms fail them: surgical footage gets misclassified as graphic content and removed, and limited editing tools force surgeons into separate software to finish their videos.

Limitations of mainstream video platforms for surgical footage

Outcomes & Impact

For surgeons, the tool achieved the goals:

  • 7.5Customer Effect ScoreOutperforms industry standard
  • 15%Trim down timeAllow users to edit efficiently
  • 8.5NPS ScoreOutperforms initial goal of 7.5

For Genesis MedTech, the product achieved the goals:

  • 85%Surgeon satisfactionDuring uploading process
  • 68%Editing retention rateOutperforms initial goal of 60%
  • 81%AI success rateOutperforms initial goal of 75%

Deep Dive: Process, Iterations, and Trade-offs

Upload flow — processing page vs. direct-to-editor

I mapped two navigation directions and ran a comparative usability study. The version showing a processing state before the editor scored 89% usability, better matching users' mental models.

Upload flow — processing page vs. direct-to-editor (1 of 2)Upload flow — processing page vs. direct-to-editor (2 of 2)

Stepped input, driven by user confidence

Research showed surgeons don't mind manual data entry — they mind re-entering data that already lives in hospital systems. Testing a 3-step form against a single-screen form, users preferred the stepped version because breaking up the task built confidence. This insight also shaped our push to auto-populate post-surgery data from partner hospitals (10+ onboarded so far).

Stepped input, driven by user confidence (1 of 2)Stepped input, driven by user confidence (2 of 2)

Advocating legal disclosures through evidence

Legal wanted dense disclosures on the upload page. Rather than push back directly, I mocked it up and tested with surgeons; the results showed the text was overwhelming, and I successfully proposed moving it to a separate static page so users could stay focused.

Advocating legal disclosures through evidence

Helping surgeons save time and mental effort on editing

For the AI-integrated one-click editing, I collaborated with the AI engineering team to understand current strengths and technical limitations. Internal data set the range we designed for — the longest surgery video ran 36 hours, with a median length of 3 hours — so we designed for edge cases to improve inclusivity, reliability, and usability for all users.

Sensitive-clip UI — clarity over alarm

For AI-flagged sensitive frames, I tested a cautionary orange treatment against a neutral, on-brand blue with plain-language copy. Surgeons — being highly educated and prone to over-reading UI — strongly preferred the calmer version, which scored significantly higher. We paired this with a “confirm deletions” pattern (over grayed-out restores) that users found clearer and more controllable.

Sensitive-clip UI — clarity over alarm (1 of 2)Sensitive-clip UI — clarity over alarm (2 of 2)

Usability testing on the AI editing feature

We designed quick-access entry points for common editing tools. We conducted mid-fidelity usability testing to ensure users could easily find and use each editing feature. All key tools met user expectations.

Usability testing on the AI editing feature

Scoping with trade-offs

Using an NN/g-based trade-off framework weighing user value against budget and timeline, the team scored features through structured voting. The Pen Tool ranked lowest (7.5) — still “desired,” but deferred from the 2025 roadmap to protect MVP focus.

Scoping with trade-offs

Next steps

Post-launch: listen, iterate, expand.

We collected real feedback from pilot users and realized the model's outputs were basic — but users said ~80% of their surgeries are routine, and they'd still use the AI-generated text as a starting point. We decided to continue refining the AI pre-fill feature and monitor engagement post-release.

Post-launch: listen, iterate, expand.

Validated demand, real integrations underway.

Users want post-surgery data to auto-populate the form, so we confirmed technical feasibility with the dev lead and secured legal and data-sharing approvals with partner hospitals. We've onboarded 10+ affiliate hospitals so far and are actively expanding integration coverage.

Validated demand, real integrations underway.

Lessons Learned

Designing for surgeons taught me that expertise changes how people read an interface. Highly educated users over-analyzed our UI copy and found cautionary visuals alarming — so clarity and calm outperformed “helpful” emphasis at every turn. I also learned to advocate through evidence, not opinion: when Legal pushed for dense on-page disclosures, a quick mockup and user test moved the decision faster than any argument could. Most of all, I saw that in high-stakes domains, earning user trust isn’t a final polish — it’s the design constraint that shapes every flow.