Wellsky (Kinnser)
Wellsky, formerly known as Kinnser, is a healthcare tech company that specializes in software used by health care providers to record patient details, documentation, medical records, and communication notes.
A service-based website focused on providing pet services to the greater Denver area. This company is dedicated to serving the community by caring for cats, dogs and even exotic animals through compassionate care and support.
Wellsky, formerly known as Kinnser, is a healthcare tech company that specializes in software used by health care providers to record patient details, documentation, medical records, and communication notes.
*Note: This project is best viewed on a desktop or tablet due to its imagery and minute details.
ABOUT
UX Researcher
Product
Designer
Figma
Figma,
Google Workspace
Google
Workspace
6 weeks
6 weeks
RESEARCH
Performed A/B testing
to examine both user
flows/navigation
and visual design
Performed A/B testing to examine both user flows/navigation and visual design
DESIGN
Purposeful
Purposeful
Simplified
Simplified
Clear
Clear
Efficient
Efficient
Focused
Focused
!
Problem
WellSky trademarked their software in 2019. It is now 2025 and there have been massive technological advancements in these past 6 years. Healthcare software has struggled with catching up with these advancements due to the complexity of their platforms. Let's dig a bit deeper to see what WellSky could update next - based on research!
Goals
Create two designs to determine which provides the best functionality and accessibility for users. Focus on data, research, and current users feedback to enforce evidence-based design decisions.
Task 1: Find the list of current patients.
Design A
Design A is the current design. The "My Patients" page is hidden under the "Go To" tab and requires 2 clicks to find.
Design A is the current design. The "My Patients" page is hidden under the "Go To" tab and requires 2 clicks to find.
Design B
Design B displays "My Patients" on the home page which eliminates the extra click required to find this highly desired page.
Results: Design B
Design B was more successful. It received a score of "3" for level of ease (3 being the highest), was completed in half the amount of time as Design A, and 0 errors. Participants described this task as: "so easy" and "very obvious".
Task 2: Find named patient and add visit type.
Design A
Design A is the current design. The user fills in the "visit type, assign to, date" sections using large choice texts and the calendar, then clicks "insert" to finalize.
Design B
Design B opens a pop-up which narrows the visual field to focus on the 3 main areas instead of scanning the whole page. Then clicks "save" to finalize.
Results: Design B
Design B was more successful. It received a score of "2.5" for level of ease (3 being the highest), and was completed in half the amount of time as Design A. Users still performed 1-3 errors, but significantly less than Design A's error amount of 3-5+. Participants described this task as: "the pop up window helps focus my attention" and "the add sign should be bigger".
Task 3: Delete the visit you created
Design A
Design A is the current design. The user must select the item to be deleted and then click "insert" to save changes.
Design A is the current design. The user must select the item to be deleted and then click "insert" to save changes.
Design B
Design B adds a visual "trash" icon and then confirms the deletion with a pop-up window. You must click "delete" to save changes.
Results: Design B
Design B was more successful. It received a score of "3" for level of ease (3 being the highest), and was completed in one third of the amount of time as Design A, and had 0 errors. Participants described this task as: "I loved it", "very easy" and "I like that it asked me to confirm to delete".
Task 4: Find when OT is visiting this patient next
Design A
Design A is the current design. The user can look at the color-coded calendar or under the "status" column to determine the next visit scheduled with OT.
Design B
Design B alters the color-coded calendar, but keeps the existing "status" column which allows the user two different areas to look to determine this answer.
Results: Tie
Neither Design A nor Design B was more successful. Design A received a score of "2" for level of ease, while Design B received a score of "2.3". The task was completed in ~19 seconds for both designs and had 1 or less errors. Participants stated they had trouble understanding where to look, the colors were confusing and it was too much information to look through.
Final Product: Design B
Find Patient List • Add Patient's Visit • Delete Patient's Visit • Find OT Schedule
Landing Page • About • Contact •
Services • FAQ • Gallery
Next Steps
- Explore and improve site map
- Explore and improve site map
- Redefine more user flows and navigation
- Redefine more user flows and navigation
- Improve task 4 and complete user testing with additional, redefined design tasks
- Improve task 4 and complete user testing with additional, redefined design tasks
A/B DESIGN TESTING
Examining two design styles and performing usability testing to determine the more efficient and successful design option.
Task 1: Find the list of current patients.
Design A
Design A is the current design. The "My Patients" page is hidden under the "Go To" tab and requires 2 clicks to find.
Design B
Design B displays "My Patients" on the home page which eliminates the extra click required to find this highly desired page.
Results: Design B
Design B was more successful. It received a score of "3" for level of ease (3 being the highest), was completed in half the amount of time as Design A, and 0 errors. Participants described this task as: "so easy" and "very obvious".
Task 2: Find named patient and add visit type.
Design A
Design A is the current design. The user fills in the "visit type, assign to, date" sections using large choice texts and the calendar, then clicks "insert" to finalize.
Design B
Design B opens a pop-up which narrows the visual field to focus on the 3 main areas instead of scanning the whole page. Then clicks "save" to finalize.
Results: Design B
Design B was more successful. It received a score of "2.5" for level of ease (3 being the highest), and was completed in half the amount of time as Design A. Users still performed 1-3 errors, but significantly less than Design A's error amount of 3-5+. Participants described this task as: "the pop up window helps focus my attention" and "the add sign should be bigger".
Task 3: Delete the visit you created
Design A
Design A is the current design. The user must select the item to be deleted and then click "insert" to save changes.
Design B
Design B adds a visual "trash" icon and then confirms the deletion with a pop-up window. You must click "delete" to save changes.
Results: Design B
Design B was more successful. It received a score of "3" for level of ease (3 being the highest), and was completed in one third of the amount of time as Design A, and had 0 errors. Participants described this task as: "I loved it", "very easy" and "I like that it asked me to confirm to delete".
Task 4: Find when OT is visiting this patient next
Design A
Design A is the current design. The user can look at the color-coded calendar or under the "status" column to determine the next visit scheduled with OT.
Design B
Design B alters the color-coded calendar, but keeps the existing "status" column which allows the user two different areas to look to determine this answer.
Results: Tie
Neither Design A nor Design B was more successful. Design A received a score of "2" for level of ease, while Design B received a score of "2.3". The task was completed in ~19 seconds for both designs and had 1 or less errors. Participants stated they had trouble understanding where to look, the colors were confusing and it was too much information to look through.