UX/UI · Healthcare · Telehealth · D2C
A Private Telehealth Flow for ED Treatment
A platform for treating a condition most people don't want to talk about: an online medical assessment, a licensed provider's review, and treatment delivered without a waiting room.
- Role
- UX/UI Designer
- Tools
- Figma
- Platform
- Responsive web
Scroll to explore ↓
01 — Overview
Medicine that has to feel private before it feels medical
The platform takes someone from a free online assessment to a licensed provider's review to a prescription treatment delivered to their door, without ever requiring a clinic visit. It also covers a second condition, hair loss, on the same underlying flow.
My scope covered the marketing landing pages, the medical intake assessment, treatment and dosage selection, checkout, and the account dashboard where a customer manages refills and messages their provider.
Designed for
Representative user profile
A first-time patient
Researching alone, likely on a phone, likely at night
Goal — find out if this is legitimate and get treatment without talking to anyone in person.
Frustration — most sites either over-explain the condition in clinical language or hide behind vague marketing that answers nothing.
02 — Challenge
Discretion and medical credibility, at the same time
Tone
Too clinical reads cold; too soft reads like it isn't real medicine.
Intake length
A real medical history needs many questions; a long form loses people before question three.
Trust
No in-person doctor and no physical storefront to point to as proof this is legitimate.
Discretion
Packaging, billing descriptors and account language all needed to stay unremarkable.
03 — Research & insights
What we learned
| Finding | Evidence | Design decision |
|---|---|---|
| A long medical history felt easier as a conversation than a form | Usability sessions showed hesitation and drop-off on multi-field pages | One question per screen |
| People tolerate more steps once they can see the end | Interview participants cited uncertainty about length as a reason for abandoning similar forms | Always-visible progress bar |
| Trust hinged on knowing a real provider was involved | Support tickets and interviews both raised doubts about legitimacy before payment | Provider named before payment is requested |
| Bright clinical blue felt exposing, not reassuring | Competitive review found most sites used bright clinical palettes; interviewees associated this with visibility, not care | Plain, muted colour palette |
"I wanted to know a real doctor was going to read this before I answered anything personal."
04 — Flow
From landing page to a package at the door
Land
Condition explained plainly, assessment framed as free
Assess
One question per screen, progress always visible
Review
A licensed provider reads the assessment
Treat
Treatment and dosage selected, subscription set up
Manage
Dashboard for refills, messages and address
05 — Interface
How the key screens were structured
06 — Design system
A palette built to read as discreet
A deep green and warm terracotta on a cream ground, away from the bright clinical blue most competitors default to. The same tokens carry both the ED and hair loss product lines.
07 — Outcome
What changed for patients
What worked
Breaking the assessment into one question per screen, with the provider named up front, turned a form that felt like paperwork into something people were willing to finish.
What I would change
The dashboard was designed after the acquisition flow shipped. Designed alongside it, refills and provider messaging could have shared more of the same patterns.