Project 01
Athenahealth
Pregnancy Lab Data Management, a tool empowering obstetricians to seamlessly record and track pregnancy-related lab data.
Role
I led the end-to-end UX design process from research to interactive prototyping for a lab data entry experience tailored to obstetricians. Conducted competitive analysis, stakeholder interviews, and usability studies, and collaborated closely with product managers, engineers, and clinical informatics.
UX Design Intern at Athenahealth
Summer 2023
Team: 5 Developers, 1 Product Manager, 1 UX Researcher
My impact
Improved User Satisfaction: 80% of users reported being pleased with the redesigned workflow, citing improved clarity and ease of use.
Increased Efficiency: Reduced time spent by providers on lab data entry tasks by 20%, streamlining their clinical documentation process.
Successful MVP Launch: My MVP design was adopted by the team and successfully shipped, contributing directly to the product roadmap.
Project Overview
02
Problem
The existing Lab Results Table was difficult to scan, cluttered with nonessential data, and required OB-GYNs to click into multiple screens to find what they needed. Clinicians expressed frustration with how much time it took to locate the latest lab results for their patients, often relying on memory or workarounds.
Goal
Redesign the labs table to make the OB Labs table more useful and identify what other functionalities providers need.
BEFORE ⟷ AFTER
03
Understanding the Users
Research
Improving Table Usability Through Clinician-Centered Research
In Round 1, I tested four ways of organizing labs: by trimester, lab status, and clinical grouping (e.g., genetic screening, ultrasound). Feedback helped identify the most intuitive structure for fast reference.
In Round 2, the goal was to uncover which in-table features would streamline routine workflows. I interviewed clinicians across roles (Midwives, NPs, Physicians, MAs) in both large and small practices. This research highlighted pain points like excessive clicking and the need for quick, inline actions, which directly shaped the design.
Quantitative Research: Conducted Concept Validation Testing using Mid-Fi designs with a total of 20 responses.
Qualitative Research: Held 15 one-on-one interviews using Mid-Fi designs to gather deeper insights.
“It is so difficult to navigate the Labs table. It takes me so long to find the lab that I want”
-OB clinician
Research Synthesis
Pain Points
Table is one long list that requires a lot of scrolling and clicks
Table is read-only – any actions that a provider needs to take must be done in another document
Competitive Analysis
Heading and organization deviates from industry
norms.
To identify gaps in the current Labs table experiences, I examined popular applications, specifically Dorsata, Cerner and eClinicalsWorks. This analysis helped me pinpoint potential areas for improvement and gather inspiration for enhancements. Key insight: No competitor had a better solution
No categories for labs
Visit based categories
No categories or sections
Design
04
Identifying the Approach
My goals for the design were to address the three main pain points identified during research by creating targeted features that directly alleviated those issues.
Pain Point
Design feature to work on
The table is one long list that requires a lot of scrolling
and clicks for providers to find what they need
Finding a way to show labs that trend over time
Table is read-only – any actions that a provider needs to
take must be done in another document
Incorporating actions within the table.
Organization does not match standard industry patterns
Finding a way to correctly section all the labs
Exploring how to visualise trending lab results
I designed 3 different options for way to show trending labs. One with a graph, arrows and with a drop-downs
Option A: Arrows ❌ Dropped
Why this design: I initially used arrows to help users visually track lab results over time and guide the eye across rows.
Feedback: Most users found the arrows distracting and hard to scan when comparing multiple labs.
Conclusion: ❌ Dropped to improve table readability and reduce visual fatigue.
Option B: Dropdown ❌ Dropped
Why this design: I introduced dropdowns to reduce visual load and let users focus on one lab result at a time.
Feedback: Users understood the interaction, but the extra click felt unnecessary for quick-glance tasks.
Conclusion: ❌ Rejected due to low usability impact and higher implementation cost.
Option C: Graph Icon ✅ Selected
Why this design: I used a graph icon to let users access trend data instantly, without crowding the table.
Feedback: Users grasped the icon's purpose immediately and appreciated the fast access to trends.
Conclusion: ✅ Chosen for its clarity, low development effort, and strong user enthusiasm.
Focusing on how labs are categorised
I explored how best to categorize pregnancy-related labs to reduce scrolling and help obstetricians quickly find what they need. I tested three options:
Option A: By Trimester ❌ Rejected
Feedback: While the structure seemed intuitive at first, users quickly noted that some labs appear across multiple trimesters. This led to confusion and redundancy.
Conclusion: ❌ Rejected due to overlap between trimesters, which hurt clarity and added cognitive friction.
Option B: By Lab Progress ❌ Rejected
Feedback: Some users understood the intent, but many felt the repeated buttons cluttered the table and made it harder to focus on the data.
Conclusion: ❌ Dropped due to reduced scannability and visual overload.
Option C: By Clinical Stage ✅ Selected
Feedback: Users overwhelmingly preferred this layout. It was simple, clear, and allowed them to view all relevant genetic information in one place without cognitive overload.
Conclusion: ✅ Selected for its clarity, efficiency, and alignment with clinical workflows.
Exploring taking quick actions on lab results directly from the table
Obstetricians found it frustrating to leave the table view to input information. Research showed they wanted to complete key actions, like reviewing labs, adding notes, or marking results as declined, directly within the table. I tested three design approaches to solve this.
Option A: Take action button ❌ Rejected
Feedback: Some users understood the intent, but many felt the repeated buttons cluttered the table and made it harder to focus on the data.
Conclusion: ❌ Dropped due to reduced scannability and visual overload.
Option B: Dropdown action buttons ❌ Rejected
Feedback: Users found the dropdown familiar but not especially helpful. It didn’t improve efficiency for routine tasks and required extra clicks.
Conclusion: ❌ Not chosen due to low impact on speed and user flow.
Option C: Checkbox with action buttons at top of table ❌ Rejected
Feedback: While conceptually clear, this approach felt too indirect for quick, single-item actions. It slowed down common workflows.
Conclusion: ❌ Rejected for adding friction to frequent interactions.
Key Insight:
✅ Users were more focused on what actions were available, not where they were placed.
Many were confused by vague terms like “Patient Declined” and unsure about “Add New Results” without supporting documentation.
Next Step:
Future iterations should prioritize clarifying and prioritizing lab actions, rather than refining their placement in the UI.
Additional Features for Speed and Clarity
High risk labs
To help clinicians quickly triage critical information, I added pill-shaped indicators for high-risk labs that appear even when the Labs section is collapsed.
✅ Result: Users could spot urgent results immediately, reducing time spent scanning.
Status column
I introduced a Status column with labels like “Reviewed” and “Ready to Review.” This boosted the table’s scannability and helped clinicians know what needed attention at a glance.
✅ Result: Helped streamline lab review workflows during rounds.
Editable notes
Users can now add or update notes directly in the table without navigating away.
✅ Result: Reduced data entry time and ensured better real-time documentation
Final Design
05
Final Prototype
Learnings and Takeaways
06
If I had more time I would :
Refine the sections further, including providing an option to differentiate between initial and standard lab results.
Conduct additional research to better understand the specific actions users want to take in the table, ensuring the interface meets their needs more effectively.
Explore new methods for highlighting lab results, such as using intuitive visual cues or interactive elements to draw attention to critical information without overwhelming the user, helping to improve efficiency in care.
Things I learned
Navigating complex problem spaces: I learned how to break down intricate issues into manageable components, ensuring that all aspects of the project are thoroughly considered and addressed.
Keeping the user’s needs at the core: I realized the importance of always prioritizing user needs in every design decision, ensuring the final product is intuitive, functional, and user-centered.
Effectively handing off designs to developers: I gained experience in communicating design intent clearly to developers, ensuring that the final product aligns with the original vision while accounting for technical feasibility and constraints.
