It’s easy to believe that booking a doctor’s appointment online should be far easier than having to make a phone call at a specific time, being caught up in a lengthy queue, with no guarantee of getting an appointment at the end of it. However, we discovered that this assumption wasn’t true in some locations in the UK. The quality of online booking processes available across the country was so variable that depending on where you lived, you could be asked between 5 and 25 questions, more in cases of complex medical needs, just to schedule a doctor’s appointment. This, at a time when missed appointments is costing some healthcare providers upwards of 600,000 pounds every month, adding strain on limited financial resources.

Today, getting patient experience right is harder than ever. Organizations must level with unprecedented technological advancements and user expectations whilst addressing budgets and burnout. Delivering the right care is about the right diagnosis but equally about communicating credibly and connecting the dots across the patient journey; this begins right from setting up an app to book an appointment to visiting the doctor, all the way through to following up on test results, scheduling follow ups and receiving proactive after care support.

Good intentions, new approaches

Medical professionals want to deliver the best care possible to their patients but have limited time and resources. An efficient and effective process that works well for both parties is the end goal. So, why has this proven so difficult to get right?

Systems are often designed from the health care providers’ mental model rather than a patient or carers’ mental model - the intended users of the system.

Complicated medical terminology, confusing diagrams, seemingly unnecessary detail and on occasion, overly cautious and potentially alarming messages are commonly found in automated processes, which do more harm than good.

Automated routing, inherent within these processes, means that one incorrectly answered question early on can lead to confusing follow up questions, frustration and early exit.

The Health Service was founded on the principle of universal access for all and it’s essential that this principle is upheld from the first point of contact to the last. So, how can this situation be improved, ensuring both the doctors and the patients’ best interests are better served?

Understanding patients better to remove friction

System providers need to stop thinking about the process as one that gives the institution the best information, and start to considering the varying needs and limitations of patients who need access to the service. There are two points of engagement with this process, the first being the initiator, an individual who needs help or advice, at a point when they may not be at their best either physically or mentally, and the second being the person of system who triages and directs the request to the best healthcare professional available.

As a first step, correctly identifying yourself to the system should be both simple and intuitive; usernames and passwords are neither. They can be complicated to remember and input, instead its far easier to use biometrics or QR codes, which are now widely accepted and easy to use.

The system should ask the patient what is absolutely necessary to assist in identifying the care professional and the assistance required. These are not diagnostic systems, they are booking systems, so they should act as such.

Offering alternative services such as a specialist nurse or a pharmacist at the right time and in the right way could offer the most appropriate and beneficial immediate care.

Using clear and simple terms throughout the process could reduce potential friction and simplify the route to completion.

Standardizing and simplifying the online processes in this way will not only reduce anxiety for the patient but also improve efficiency and effectiveness of receptionists and healthcare professionals when processing an appointment made online.

What initially looks like a logical and sensible process to create to a system engineer can look different to a concerned and unwell member of the public. An incorrectly completed form or a frustrated exit from the process fails both the patient and the doctor. Understanding both sets of people in this process is essential if we are to make platforms such as this fit for purpose.