top of page
.jpg)
Simplifying Symptom Tracking
Working with the cross-functional AsthmaTuner team on redesigning the app's core treatment tool to more accurately track patients' asthma.
UX/UI DESIGN & RESEARCH • IN-HOUSE WORK • 2020
PROCESS
Problem Brief
Defining the MVP
Ideation & Sketching
Quick & Dirty Testing
Risk Analysis: Round 1
Back to the Drawing Board
Risk Analysis: Round 2
Release & Outcome
UX TEAM
Me (UX Designer & Researcher)
Isabella Smolarski (Lead Designer at AsthmaTuner)
Peter Sommer (Product Manager)
OUTCOME
Alongside more accurate symptom tracking, users also reported feeling more confident and capable documenting their asthma.
Old AsthmaTuner symptom tracking form
Problem Brief
AsthmaTuner is a Stockholm-based digital health startup helping people with asthma live symptom-free. The app and companion bluetooth spirometer replace traditional diary-tracking and static treatment plans with tailored care in three steps (see below).
While working at AsthmaTuner, I was tasked with improving the experience and design consistency of the old symptom tracking form (see right). As users track their symptoms every day, some multiple times a day, it was critical for their experience with it to be straightforward and seamless.
Defining the MVP
I worked with the rest of the design team to draft MVP requirements. Previous user research insights had revealed usability and comprehension issues with the old interface and it was important that the redesign tackled them as well.
All of our MoSCoW prioritization 'Musts' focused on clarity, feedback, and user understanding without a significant learning curve.
Ideation & Sketching
I iterated on several concept sketches and met with the team for feedback every few days. Out of the concepts below, ultimately we decided to pursue the fourth, which included larger buttons for each individual symptom, a calendar aid for the timeline the user should think back on when documenting symptoms, and a simplified progress bar.
From that point on I fleshed out the design and after three iterations, we agreed that the final alternatives were ready to be evaluated by actual users.
Quick & Dirty Testing
User testing is the backbone of any good design, so the earlier users are welcomed in the better. Testing doesn’t always have to be extensive - often ‘quick & dirty’ can be enough to catch major issues without compromising time and other resources. Small-scale usability testing with a hi-fi prototype helped me find and fix issues with the design before starting on more thorough risk analysis.
I recruited 7 people for two rounds of think-aloud usability tests, during which they were prompted with tasks and scenarios typical of actual users. Even though none of the participants were familiar with AsthmaTuner or necessarily even had asthma, they still identified important usability issues.
Risk Analysis: Round 1
As part of medical regulatory requirements, any design changes to treatment tools need to be evaluated for potential risks. In this case, there was a risk that users would over- or under- estimate their health condition. Before the design got the green light, I had to prove that users understand and feel confident that they’ve correctly documented symptoms that align with their condition in the new design just as well as they do in the old design.
Participants documented their asthma symptoms in two prototypes, one for each design. After each task, they filled out the shortened User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ-S); this gave me insights on the pragmatic and heuristic differences between the two designs. Finally, I followed up with a short interview.
TEST TYPE
Comparative study
METHODS
Hi-Fi prototyping
UEQ-S questionnaire
Semi-structured interview
PARTICIPANTS (10)
5 AsthmaTuner users
5 people with asthma but no experience in app
Results
I expected the new design to perform better, but the results told a different story. The redesign was rated lower for pragmatic quality, which suggested poorer usability compared to the old design. I used this as a lens for analyzing the interview data, which shed light on confusing aspects of the design.
QUALITATIVE FEEDBACK
1 Selecting symptoms is more confusing and less intuitive in redesign
2 Redesign takes longer to ‘learn’
3 Day-based visual calendar suggests daily symptom tracking, instead of weekly
4 Difficult to tell what day user is on from calendar
5 Redesign is more visually appealing
QUANTITATIVE FEEDBACK
Original design is more usable, less visually appealing
Redesign is less usable, more visually appealing
Back to the Drawing Board
There were no two ways about it: the new design wasn’t going to cut it. The timeline did not help explain to users that they should document their symptoms from the past week, the buttons were less intuitive for selection and feedback than the toggles, and overall the new design took longer to 'learn' on first glance. There were too many issues with elements of the new design for it to feel worthwhile to keep working with that concept. So, I went back to the drawing board.
I decided to take a second look at the original design and iterate on that instead, since it was still acceptable for users despite the weak points brought up in the original problem brief. Working with the feedback from testing, I integrated elements of the previous concept but kept the original visual structure.
The drawing board
Risk Analysis: Round 2
I ran the same comparative study to analyze the risk of releasing the new design. This time, the results significantly favored the new design, both on usability and visual appeal. Participants understood that they should document their symptoms from the past 7 days, and found the selection intuitive and quick.
Participants documented their asthma symptoms in two prototypes, one for each design. After each task, they filled out the shortened User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ-S); this gave me insights on the pragmatic and heuristic differences between the two designs. Finally, I followed up with a short interview.
TEST TYPE
Comparative study
METHODS
Hi-Fi prototyping
UEQ-S questionnaire
Semi-structured interview
PARTICIPANTS (10)
5 AsthmaTuner users
5 people with asthma but no experience in app
Results
QUALITATIVE FEEDBACK
1 “7-day” or “week” time frame correctly identified from prompt
2 New icon design improves readability and symptom recognition
3 No pre-fill provides confirmation of symptom selection
4 Simpler symptom copy is easier to digest and understand
5 Inconsistencies in answers between two interfaces
QUANTITATIVE FEEDBACK
Original design is less usable, less visually appealing
Redesign is more usable, more visually appealing
Release & Outcome
After several design and testing iterations, we could confidently release a new design for symptom tracking in the AsthmaTuner app that helps our users accurately and capably document their asthma.
Additionally, our PM and CTO recognized that the risk analysis had been some of the most thorough they'd ever done for a new design, and AsthmaTuner has repeated the testing process for more releases since.
Other Work
© 2023 by aleksandra.soltan@gmail.com
bottom of page