From MVP to iteration — cutting friction in medical workflows by 68%

The specialty of anesthesiology is the fifth most numerous of all medical specialties in Brazil. According to our quantitative survey conducted in 2020 with more than 550 responses, more than 50% of these doctors don't understand or understand partially their proceedure's pricing methods. According to the research, out of 25,500 anesthesiologists, almost 10,000 do not understand how to charge for their anesthetic procedures.

Many doctors do not fully understand billing methods, leading to frequent miscalculations due to manual accounting.

The demanding routine of these professionals, characterized by a heavy workload and the challenge of managing a large number of patients, makes the need for centralized management even more urgent.

55,6% of doctors don’t fully understand the billing methods
61,2% of doctors manage cash flow personally
47,9% of doctors use spreadsheet
36,6% of doctors track it manually

The procedure's registration main feature of the AnestPlan app was first designed following the specifiations required to automatically calculate the proceedure's final price, such as time and proceedure's duration, age, gender and patient's weight, numbers and quantity of anesthesias’ codes and many others.

To calculate the price of an anesthesia procedure, it is necessary to follow these steps:

To understand the fee calculation flow, we mapped the user journey to identify decision-making steps and key input fields—providing essential data for designing the back-end architecture of the automated calculation process.

After a few low-fidelity sketches, we developed a design style guide to define icons, colors, and typography for the MVP development.

To give form to the idea and deliver an initial version, I developed an MVP that addressed the project's core needs. For the calculation of anesthetic procedures, the first version followed a pop-up–based interaction model, where actions like adding, editing, or removing anesthesias were handled through modal windows. Selected anesthesias accumulated as “tags” representing the user's choices. At the end of the process, the app presented the suggested final fee for the surgery.

To validate the MVP already in production, gather feedback, and collect both quantitative and qualitative data on user perception and evaluation, we conducted remote, semi-structured usability tests. Five sessions were sufficient to reach saturation, as recurring patterns in feedback emerged consistently.

Based on the data collected, I conducted an affinity mapping analysis to group findings by semantic similarity. This method helped identify clear patterns and outliers in users' behaviors and perceptions regarding the product’s usability.

Lengthy registration process
Most users complained about the excessive number of mandatory fields during registration and when logging procedures, which significantly slowed them down.

Lack of clarity in text and commands
Many users expressed confusion due to unclear instructions or ambiguous interface copy.

Poor visibility of selected anesthetics
Users often failed to understand how selected anesthetics were displayed — as tags below the procedure search bar — which caused uncertainty during the process.

To address the usability issues identified, we proposed a functional and visual redesign of the registration flow.

Prioritizing relevant content
In the subsequent step, we used a toggle component to display only the necessary fields. This approach minimizes screen clutter and helps users focus on the most relevant information, reducing cognitive load.

Reduced cognitive load in forms
Previously, users were required to fill out 25 fields, which created significant friction. The new design reduces the number of mandatory fields to just 8 — a 68% decrease — considerably reducing friction and making the form faster and easier to complete. Optional information such as phone number or email can still be added via an “Add more fields” button at the end of the form. Additionally, we reduced the vertical margins between fields from 16px to 12px to optimize space and minimize scrolling, making the overall experience more efficient.

Improving anesthetic selection flow
As modal dialogs can harm usability by interrupting thought processes, creating urgency, and overloading users with decisions, we eliminated pop-ups and modals that previously interrupted user flow. In our case, the anesthetic selection flow previously relied on several modals, each with various buttons and options, significantly increasing the cognitive effort required for a critical task.

To solve this, the new design adopts bottom sheets instead of modals. This approach preserves user context, allowing for more fluid interactions without abrupt disruptions, and enhances overall ease of use.

📋 25 required fields

🧠 High cognitive load

❓ Lack of clear instructions

🚧 Overuse of modals interrupting the flow

✅ Reduced friction with 68% fewer required fields
⏱️ Shorter completion time
🧘 Lower cognitive load
👆 Toggles and bottom sheets to simplify the UI
🚫 No modals — uninterrupted flow