Project Overview
As the UX designer, I was responsible for creating a user-centric solution to streamline and modernize how small to medium-sized clinics manage daily operations—from appointments and consultations to inventory, invoicing, and staff coordination.
Our goal was to design a highly functional yet intuitive system tailored to doctors, nurses, pharmacists, lab technicians, and clinic owners—especially those running multiple clinics or balancing a heavy consultation load.
Industry
Healthcare (2020-2021)
Target Users
Doctors, Clinic Owners and Clinic Staff
Role
-- Led end-to-end UX design process
-- Conducted user research and analysis
-- Facilitated ideation workshops and created experience maps
-- Created low-fidelity wireframes and prototypes using Axure RP9
-- Conducted remote usability testing
-- Collaborated closely with UI designers and developers
While several healthcare management systems exist in the market, most are designed for large hospitals or multi-specialty institutions—making them overly complex and expensive for small to mid-sized clinics. During our research, it became evident that small clinics and solo practitioners face unique challenges:
-- Existing systems are cost-prohibitive, with pricing models that don’t scale down for smaller practices.
-- Many tools are feature-heavy, making them overwhelming for users who need only core functionalities.
-- Clinics often rely on a combination of Excel sheets, manual registers, and messaging apps to manage patients, staff schedules, billing, and inventory—leading to inefficiency and errors.
-- Doctors and clinic staff lack time and training for software onboarding, making ease of use and minimal learning curve a critical factor.
We saw a clear opportunity to design a lean, modular, and user-friendly clinic management application tailored specifically to the workflows of small clinics—offering just the right balance between functionality, flexibility, and simplicity.
DISCOVER
User Interviews
To better understand users and context, we conducted semi-structured interviews over Zoom with 4 doctors (2 also clinic owners) and 5 clinic owners/managers. Our goal was to understand their daily tasks, frustrations with existing tools, and expectations from a digital system.
Key Findings
-- Most clinics used Excel, Tally, or manual records to track finances and inventory.
-- Existing software was seen as too expensive, overcomplicated, or not scalable for solo practitioners.
-- Doctors expressed frustration with switching between multiple tools to manage clinics and view patient history.
-- Many preferred handwritten consultations but wanted access to prior records and images digitally.
Persona Creation
Based on interview insights, we developed 3 key personas:
Dr. Ahmed – A busy general practitioner managing 2 clinics
Ms. Riya – A clinic manager juggling appointments, staff, and billing
Mr. Issac – A solo practitioner seeking a simple, affordable tool
DEFINE
After gathering rich insights from user interviews, the next step was to synthesize our findings and clearly define the user needs, workflows, and pain points. This phase was critical in translating raw qualitative data into actionable design direction.
Experience Mapping & Mental Models
To build a shared understanding of how users think and operate in their daily tasks, we created experience maps and cognitive models. These helped visualize:
-- The current journey and task flow across roles (doctors, clinic managers, support staff)
-- Pain points and breakdowns in their existing process
-- Opportunities where a digital tool could improve efficiency or reduce cognitive load
We collaboratively conducted these mapping exercises in Miro with the UX team, UI designer, Project Manager, and System Architect.
Cognitive Mapping
Given the unstructured nature of many clinic workflows, we used cognitive maps to explore mental models and domain-specific associations—especially around:
-- Appointment booking and calendar views
-- Patient consultation (notes, prescriptions, images)
-- Inventory management (stock, purchase, usage tracking)
-- Clinic-level vs. doctor-level permissions and views
-- Multi-clinic data access and switching context
These visual maps enabled us to:
-- Identify workflow overlaps and cross-role dependencies
-- Understand where fragmentation happens (e.g., stock managed in one place, invoices generated elsewhere)
-- Prioritize high-impact areas like quick patient lookup, intuitive navigation between clinics, and inventory alerts
We frequently referred back to interview participants to validate our interpretations of these maps. This ensured we were not working on assumptions but aligning our understanding with users' mental models.
IDEATE
Framing with 'How Might We' Questions
With key user insights and system mapping in place, our next step was to generate design opportunities and translate user pain points into actionable solutions. We held a collaborative session using the “How Might We” (HMW) framework. This technique helped us reframe problem statements into open-ended opportunities, encouraging idea generation without prematurely jumping to solutions. We categorized the HMWs based on functionality areas (e.g., appointments, stock, billing) and used them to drive ideation workshops. Below are sample HMW questions developed:
Idea Generation
We used a combination of User flow whiteboarding to define how each persona would navigate the system and Feature prioritization (via MoSCoW and impact-effort matrix) to decide what to include in our MVP. This phase helped the team converge on feasible yet impactful directions for the initial prototype.
DESIGN
Once key solution ideas were validated internally, we moved to develop tangible representations of those ideas through low-fidelity wireframes and task-based flows.
Sketching
We began with paper sketches of key screens: Appointment calendar, Consultation screen (notes + image capture), Patient profile and history view, Purchase and stock entry form and Doctor schedule and profile. These sketches were circulated among the project team (PM, UI designer, architect) for early feedback and adjustments before digital prototyping began.
Wireframing & Interaction Flows
Using Axure RP9, we built a clickable low-fidelity prototype to simulate key workflows: Booking an appointment, Conducting a consultation and creating a prescription, Updating product stock from a new purchase entry, Navigating between clinics and roles
Key principles followed:
-- Progressive disclosure to reduce visual overwhelm
-- Consistency in interaction patterns for learnability
-- Task-first design—each screen was optimized for the primary action
Appointments listing screen for Doctors
New Appointment screen
Consultation screen for Doctors
Visits & Diagnosis History screen for Doctors
Tests History screen for Doctors
Pharmacist screen for prescribing medicines
Products Stock
Purchase Entries
TEST
Usability Testing & Iteration
With a working prototype in place, we entered the usability testing phase—a critical step to validate our designs with real users before moving to high-fidelity UI and development. Our goal was to test how well the solution supported user tasks, uncover usability issues early, and ensure that our assumptions aligned with actual user expectations.
Testing Objectives
We structured our tests around the following goals:
Task Completion: Can users successfully complete core tasks like booking appointments, updating stock, or navigating between clinics?
Navigation Clarity: Is the user flow logical and intuitive across different user roles?
Content & Layout Understanding: Do users understand what each screen or form is for, and what’s expected?
Feature Discovery: Can users find and use key features without guidance (e.g., viewing patient history, managing doctor schedule)?
Cognitive Load: Is the interface overwhelming, or does it support users in making confident decisions?
Testing Methodology
We conducted remote moderated usability testing through zoom with 6 participants. All participants had previously taken part in user interviews, ensuring familiarity with the project’s goals and allowing us to measure improvements based on their earlier feedback. Low fidelity clickable axure prototypes were used for testing with task based scenarios and open ended questions. Sessions were recorded with consent and notes were logged in usability issue tracker (google sheet).
Example Tasks:
-- "You’re a doctor working at two clinics. Find the list of today’s appointments for both locations."
-- "Enter a consultation for a returning patient and try prescribing 2 medicines and a test."
-- "Log a purchase of 100 units of a medicine and check stock levels."
Key Insights & Iterations
Navigation Confusion (Multi-Clinic Context) (Explained in below image)
Issue: Users often forgot which clinic they were operating under.
Solution: Added a persistent clinic context switcher at the top of the interface, along with visual indicators on each page
Stock Update Misinterpretation
Issue: Managers confused "Add Purchase Entry" with "Update Stock" and feared duplication.
Solution: Added tooltips and separated workflows into clearly labeled tabs with icons and helper text.
Feedback on Visual Hierarchy
-- Users requested more prominent alerts (e.g., low stock, unpaid invoices).
-- Adjusted layout spacing, introduced color-coded badges, and added alert indicators to the dashboard summary tiles.
Version 1 and version 2 of department drop-downs and status filters
Version 1 and version 3 of clinic selection and clinic functionalities
Version 1 and version 3 of the user profile options
-- 100% of participants could complete all core tasks by the final iteration
-- Task completion time improved by 30–40% over early testing rounds
-- Navigation success rate increased from 65% to 92% after clinic switcher fix
-- Participants rated the prototype as “simple and familiar”, especially compared to tools they had tried before
One of the most important lessons I learned was the power of iterative design driven by real user feedback. Designing for small clinics required balancing essential functionality with simplicity, while accounting for real-world constraints like limited budgets and varying tech comfort levels.
By focusing on actual workflows and involving users at every stage, we were able to create a solution that felt intuitive, familiar, and genuinely helpful. This project reinforced that great UX is not about more features—but about making the right tasks easier, faster, and more human.
