Medical Device Technology for Diabetes
As a Senior UX researcher, I executed and supervised 50+ mixed-methods research studies on diabetes tech. This includes generative research, longitudinal research, A/B testing, survey design, usability testing, etc. These are my favorites!
Emotional Impact of Diabetes
Accessibility
Alarm System Redesign
Note: People with diabetes referred to as “PWDs”
ACCESSIBILITY
Assessing accessibility opportunities in diabetes technology
GOALS
Initialize an inclusive design initiative
Understand and compare the experience of using any diabetes medical device with vs. without vision, hearing, or dexterity impairments
Rank impacts of design change opportunities for each group
METHODOLOGY
Step
IDIs with PWDs with vision loss or blindness
Survey with PWDs both with and without vision, dexterity, and hearing impairments
Reasoning
Unconfined discovery qual to uncover initial opportunities, understand how to conduct accessibility research/audits, and establish collaborative relationship with accessibility advocates
Quantify differences and similarities between groups to hierarchize impacts of issues and prioritize design changes
IMPACT
Actionable recommendations for product accessibility improvements
Standardized use of accessible code for future product development
Follow-up: accessibility audit of current products
Follow-up: assessment of impairment prevalence among diabetes population, which led to widespread team understanding of diabetes comorbidities and benefit of designing for changing health traits of target market
Established accessible research practices for the UXR team
TOP INSIGHTS
Inaccessible diabetes tech forces blind or low-vision PWDs to use outdated technology, sacrifice independence by depending on sighted caregivers, develop cumbersome, sometimes dangerous workarounds for essential diabetes management tasks, and face worse health outcomes.
Many difficulties associated with accessibility issues were also difficult for those without accessibility issues
Those with vision and dexterity impairments reported the highest negative impact on treatment and need specific design improvements
CHALLENGES
Impairment-specific design changes require more effort for impact on a smaller user group, which necessitates higher stakeholder buy-in
It’s more complicated to address accessibility in existing products (vs. future products)
ALARMS SYSTEM REDESIGN
Address stress impact of existing alarm system
GOALS
Minimize alarm fatigue while maintaining safety by understanding current alarms experience to build new alarm system
Test and refine new alarm system design
METHODOLOGY
Step
Metasynthesis of existing insights
IDIs about consolidated insights
In-depth redesign of alarms ecosystem
In-person testing
Survey
Reasoning
Consolidate data to determine research direction
Confirm consolidated insights within context of redesign
Align user needs with requirements from Engineering, Regulatory, Clinical, Design, and Human Factors
Alarms need to be experienced in person to gather accurate feedback
Quantify feedback and prioritize feature changes
IMPACT
Entirely redesigned alarms ecosystem with less obtrusive alarms
New collaboration process with teams that typically worked in silos
TOP INSIGHTS
Alarm discretion is important for some, but others’ top priority is hearing their alarms in a timely fashion, regardless of how they impact others; thus, design recommendations accounted for both groups
Study yielded design requirements for which alarms are considered critical vs. less critical, how each should function, and preferences on silencing
CHALLENGES
Providing recommendations that account for the mismatch between participants’ requests for maximum customization and evidence that users didn’t frequently customize their alarms
Designing alarm defaults to accommodate users who err on the side of discretion vs. those who prefer more noticeable alarms
Balancing stakeholder desire for simplicity with participant requests for customization
EMOTIONAL IMPACT OF DIABETES
Uncover emotional motivators behind diabetes decisions to design with emotional safety considerations
GOALS
Explore underlying motivations behind diabetes management decisions to uncover emotional drivers and behavioral patterns
Understand how users weigh effort versus health outcomes when making diabetes management decisions
Understand how product design impacts quality of life outside of health outcomes
METHODOLOGY
Step
IDIs
[this was an ongoing project]
Reasoning
Safe space to discuss vulnerable topics and be prompted with unfamiliar stimuli
TOP INSIGHTS
Certainty reduces the need for control: Control-seeking behaviors are a stress-response to fear; predictable system behavior, even if imperfect, can reduce this need.
Trust is earned through reliability: Participants are skeptical of new systems unless they demonstrate consistent, predictable performance.
IMPACT
Beginning of culture shift away from assumptions that users desire control and towards designing to minimize the fear that contributes to control-seeking behaviors
Future prioritizing of designs that adapt to lives of users rather than requiring users to adapt to the system
Emotional burden is normalized: Many PWDs accept the mental load of diabetes as routine, masking deeper frustrations and unmet needs.
Fear drives behavior: Concerns about long-term complications and the desire to stay healthy for loved ones are powerful motivators.
Current treatment options amplify undesired decisions: PWDs often choose between glucose control and living freely, leading to guilt, shame, and burnout.
CHALLENGES
Stakeholder preconceived expectations of research output, plus predefined business limitations, influenced the study design