01 — Overview
A platform built for patients managing complex, chronic conditions
MyCareteam is a digital care coordination platform designed for patients living with chronic conditions — such as heart failure, diabetes, and COPD — connecting them with their extended care team (doctors, nurses, dietitians, physiotherapists) in one unified place.
The platform had grown organically over several years, accumulating features that felt disconnected. Patients were overwhelmed. Clinicians found it hard to get a clear snapshot of a patient's status. The task was to rethink the experience from the ground up — guided by evidence, shaped by empathy, and constrained by the real-world workflows of both patients and providers.
02 — Problem
Too many features. Too little clarity.
Users — many of them older adults managing multiple medications, appointments, and health goals — were abandoning tasks halfway. The information architecture had no clear hierarchy. Notifications were undifferentiated. The care team directory was buried three levels deep.
For clinicians, the provider-side view lacked the at-a-glance summaries needed to triage patient messages quickly. The result was delays in care communication and increased administrative burden for nursing staff.
"I gave up trying to find where to send a message to my nurse. I just called instead."
— Patient, 64, Hypertension + Type 2 Diabetes
Patient pain points
Fragmented navigation; no clear entry point. Vital tracking buried in sub-menus. Appointment reminders not actionable. Goal-setting disconnected from clinical guidance. Cognitive overload on the home screen.
Provider pain points
No patient health snapshot. Message prioritisation was manual. Duplicate data entry from EHR. No flag system for urgent readings. Reports required excessive clicking to generate.
03 — Research
Listening before designing anything
A mixed-methods research sprint ran for six weeks — combining remote moderated usability sessions, contextual inquiry visits to a cardiac rehabilitation clinic, diary studies with patients, and structured interviews with clinical staff.
01
Usability Audit
Heuristic evaluation + task analysis across 24 core flows. Identified 47 distinct usability issues, severity-rated.
02
User Interviews
18 patient sessions and 12 clinician interviews. Conducted via video call and on-site at two partner hospitals.
03
Diary Studies
8 patients kept a 2-week digital diary tracking when and why they opened (or avoided) the app each day.
04
Analytics Review
Quantitative drop-off analysis on 6 months of session data. Identified exact abandonment points in key flows.
Three primary personas emerged: the Self-Managing Patient (tech-comfortable, high engagement), the Supported Patient (relies on a family member as proxy user), and the Clinical Coordinator (manages 30–80 patients, needs triage and status tools). All design decisions were weighted against these three lenses.
04 — Design Process
From chaos to calm architecture
The redesign centred on a single principle: reduce the number of decisions a patient must make per session. Every screen was evaluated against that frame. Navigation was restructured around four primary destinations — Dashboard, My Team, Goals, and Messages — each with a clear, singular purpose.
For providers, a new Coordinator View introduced a patient roster with at-a-glance status indicators, message triage queue, and flagging for abnormal vitals — surfacing what mattered without requiring a full chart review.
IA Restructure
Flat, four-tab navigation replacing a nested 3-level menu. Card sorting with 24 users validated the new structure. 91% success rate vs 38% prior.
Dashboard Redesign
Prioritised greeting + next action + vitals snapshot above the fold. Removed 14 widgets not used by 80%+ of patients. Reduced cognitive load significantly.
Design System
Built a component library in Figma with WCAG 2.1 AA compliance built in. Type scale, colour tokens, and spacing grid documented and handed off to engineering.
Accessibility
Minimum contrast 4.5:1 across all text. Touch targets ≥44px. Screen reader tested with NVDA and VoiceOver on key flows. Large-text mode added.
Navigation structure before & after redesign — flattened from 3-level hierarchy to 4 primary tabs
05 — Outcomes
Measured impact, real results
The redesigned platform launched to a phased rollout across three partner hospitals and a general patient cohort. Usability testing post-launch showed statistically significant improvements across all tracked metrics.
Task success rate: 38% → 91%
Across the 6 core patient flows (message care team, log a vital, view appointment, update goal, access document, request refill), measured in moderated usability sessions post-launch.
Average screens per task: 4.1 → 1.8
Flattened IA and improved wayfinding cut the number of screens users navigated to complete common tasks by more than half, reducing frustration and abandonment.
NPS improved from 22 to 61
Net Promoter Score collected at 90 days post-launch across the patient cohort. A 39-point uplift signals a fundamental shift in how patients feel about using the platform.
Provider triage time reduced by 34%
Clinical coordinators reported spending significantly less time on message routing and status-checking, freeing capacity for higher-value patient interactions.
WCAG 2.1 AA compliant — first time in product history
All new screens passed automated and manual accessibility checks. Large-text and high-contrast modes added as opt-in settings, with zero premium framing.
06 — Reflection
What I learned
Healthcare UX demands a level of precision — and humility — that is rare in other domains. Users are sometimes anxious, often fatigued, and always operating within real clinical and emotional stakes. Design decisions here carry weight beyond aesthetics.
The most valuable thing I did on this project was not a wireframe — it was spending a day shadowing a cardiac nurse coordinator as she worked through her patient list. That single session reframed every assumption I had brought into the project and produced better design decisions than any workshop could have.
If I were to do this again, I would push for a permanent patient advisory panel rather than point-in-time research cohorts. Longitudinal voices would help catch regression and surface emerging needs as conditions change over time.