Case: a gynecology clinic, its care flows and its website

The client is a Swedish care provider in gynecology and women’s health, comprising three clinics. The engagement ran from late October 2023 to mid-March 2024, at roughly half time, some years before the studio took its current name. The starting position: two founders who owned the care and the business, a digital care platform bought and unconfigured, premises being fitted out, and an opening date.

What the engagement covered

• Technical lead-up to opening: equipment, accounts, domain and email, and a walkthrough of the premises against hygiene and accessibility requirements.
• The patient flows in the digital care platform: visit types, questionnaires, booking, video visits, fees, and the rules for rescheduling and cancellation.
• The connections between the systems, so that booking, medical records, questionnaire answers and messages held together as a single path for the patient.
• The website: information architecture, design, technical SEO, and articles on the clinic’s own subject areas.

Why the care flows came before the website

A clinic that opens needs, above all, to be able to receive a patient. A website describing a practice that receives nobody yet is a brochure. So the first six weeks went to the platform and the premises, and the website stood still. The clinic opened on 15 December 2023 with a site that had the wrong content and no keyword structure, and it was rebuilt from January to March.

That was a deliberate choice with a known cost. An opening date can be missed in a way that costs rent, salaries and credibility; a website can launch six weeks later and costs visibility during the launch. The trade-off was written down when it was made, which is why it can be described here.

The questionnaires were product work

Every visit type has its own questionnaire, and the questionnaire is the first thing a patient meets. The platform’s default texts became a starting point, and each visit type then got its own version: what happens when the case is submitted, what the visit costs, how quickly the clinic gets back in touch, which rules apply on cancellation, and the question of whether clinical staff may read the patient’s records.

A document of a few pages took four weeks of calendar time. Every phrase had to match what the clinic could actually deliver, and be reviewed by a midwife or a gynecologist before it went live. That is the pace the work keeps when the copy is part of the care, and it is worth planning for.

The systems that had to hold together

A digital practice runs on several systems that each work on their own and together leave gaps: booking on the web and in the app, medical records, questionnaire answers, video meetings, SMS confirmations, and the region’s own channels. The work was to draw the whole patient path, name which system owns each step, and remove the steps where staff had to copy details across by hand.

One concrete example: the platform’s automatic notifications sent several messages per booking. They were cut back in February 2024 to those that carried information the patient needed. The decision has a downside — fewer reminders raises the risk of no-shows — and trade-offs of that kind are what a flow is made of.

The website: structure before copy

The rebuild started in January 2024 with the information architecture: which pages should exist, what each one answers, and which search question it owns. The clinic’s subject areas — endometriosis and women’s health broadly — are things patients search for in their own words long before they search for a clinic. The articles were written against those words, and the visual language was developed with an external illustrator.

What would be done differently

Two things. The website’s structure could have run in parallel with the platform work back in November, since structure can be settled before the content exists; that would have pulled the launch six weeks forward at almost no extra cost. And measurement was set up too late, which is why the engagement can be described in decisions and dates while lacking figures on traffic and bookings.

The second lesson is the more expensive of the two, and it shows in this article: an engagement with no measurement from day one can be described but never proven. Every engagement since starts with measurement in place before the first page is built.