Product | Estimates
Year | Aug 2021 - Jun 2022
Type | Research, Strategy, UX
Role | Product Designer
Rivet Health
Rivet’s Estimates product is essential to helping providers manage their financial relationship between patients and payers by calculating procedure estimates to the patient before and at the time of an appointment.
Goal
Identity any usability issues and determine the critical features to prioritize for the next iteration of the Estimates product to help improve user adoption and customer satisfaction.
How Estimates Work
The patient experience without Rivet provides no price transparency to the patient resulting in a surprising amount of medical bills months after a procedure.
Rivet allows providers to give up front estimates to patients through out the medical journey, resulting in price transparency to patients and being paid on-time for procedures.
Understanding the Problem
To figure out the problem and boost the use of our product, we needed to identify a basic metric for adoption. This would be the standard we could use to gauge how well our efforts were paying off overall.
We found that only 32% of our practices had reached adoption so we wanted to make that the focal point for our design efforts.
Interviewing
In order to understand the root of our adoption problems, I conducted interviews with 12 end-users (front office workers) to understand the issues that they encounter while using Estimates.
Research Focus:
Understand the user goals and needs
Uncovering pain points with the existing user journey
Determining the success of the tasks measured
Gathering Insights + Prioritizing Issues
After conducting interviews with our end-users, we had a lot of data that we needed to categorize. I decided to cluster the responses using thematic analysis that represent pain points, motivations and behaviors.
During the analysis, the following themes and key insights of users were found:
83% of users were confused by the difference between Primary Service Type and All Service Types
50% of users did not use the auto service type selection by CPT because they did not know what it did
33% of users felt that the auto service type Selection based on CPTs were disconnected from the code section
75% of users did not trust the benefits that were being auto-selected for the selected service type
Prioritizing Issues
We quickly found that there was an overwhelming of amount of information that we could tackle. So we decided to start prioritizing and ranking issues that not only aligned to our user’s needs, but also the business needs.
I used the Severity Framework rank issues then worked with Product and Engineering to ultimately prioritize how we would tackle them in the upcoming two quarters.
Ideating a Solution
Based on the problems identified, I worked towards addressing these pains by coming up with potential solutions:
Reduce the amount of decisions a user has to make for service type
Prioritize auto selection based on CPTs because it returned more accurate benefits
Allow a user to access advanced settings where they still have access to manual selection
Improve how we show users the benefits we chose based on service type selections
User Testing
We conducted usability testing sessions with 5 users from the initial discovery research to validate if the solution will help with their problems:
Thought All Service Types was unnecessary and trusted Rivet to provide the correct fall-backs if needed.
Overwhelming positive reaction to the auto selected Service Type w/description being exposed next to the benefit.
Some users wanted a full list of benefit options available on our Eligibility checks to choose from.
Overall users liked being able to select one Service Type in the dropdown.
Outcomes
After we made adjustments from our user testing feedback, we started shipping incrementally and have seen improvement to our user adoption.
