2024

BleuDoc: Turning Feedback into Care

Improving the digital health experience for multigenerational users

Context

CASSI is the largest self-managed health plan operator in Brazil, serving active and retired employees of Banco do Brasil and their families. During my initial analysis, I found that users constantly switched between website and app, experiencing recurring frustrations with the digital experience — a unique opportunity for a user-centered redesign with a focus on inclusivity across generations.

My Role

UX Designer & Researcher

Tools

Figma, FigJam, Miro, Notion, Google Sheets, user flows, personas, surveys, user interviews, card sorting, brainstorming, wireframes, prototypes, usability testing

Duration

4 months (July – October 2024)

Type

Independent redesign

The Challenge

How to transform a health plan app that frustrates thousands of users into an inclusive, clear, and trustworthy experience for all age groups?

Three critical areas identified

Confusing navigation: difficulty finding reimbursement, membership card, and accredited network
Complex flows: poorly guided processes causing abandonment and support requests
Low accessibility: design not adapted for users 50+, issues with contrast and usability

The central challenge was to redesign while respecting regulatory requirements, preserving familiarity, but introducing meaningful usability improvements.

User Feedback

“Hard to find the service I wanted; there are no visible icons for reimbursement, for example.”
“Cassi’s layout is terrible, especially for us older folks.”
“Very complicated to navigate service providers.”
“Trying to access the financial section (statement, current fee), I can’t.”
“Very confusing, not practical or dynamic.”
“Difficult app to use; I’ve been trying since morning and can’t.”
“Terrible experience, hard access. Too much unnecessary information.”
“App doesn’t have a user-friendly interface, doesn’t comply with ANS requirements.”
“Difficult for elderly who have no experience with computing.”
“Hard to find the service I wanted; there are no visible icons for reimbursement, for example.”
“Cassi’s layout is terrible, especially for us older folks.”
“Very complicated to navigate service providers.”
“Trying to access the financial section (statement, current fee), I can’t.”
“Very confusing, not practical or dynamic.”
“Difficult app to use; I’ve been trying since morning and can’t.”
“Terrible experience, hard access. Too much unnecessary information.”
“App doesn’t have a user-friendly interface, doesn’t comply with ANS requirements.”
“Difficult for elderly who have no experience with computing.”
“Hard to find the service I wanted; there are no visible icons for reimbursement, for example.”
“Cassi’s layout is terrible, especially for us older folks.”
“Very complicated to navigate service providers.”
“Trying to access the financial section (statement, current fee), I can’t.”
“Very confusing, not practical or dynamic.”
“Difficult app to use; I’ve been trying since morning and can’t.”
“Terrible experience, hard access. Too much unnecessary information.”
“App doesn’t have a user-friendly interface, doesn’t comply with ANS requirements.”
“Difficult for elderly who have no experience with computing.”
“Hard to find the service I wanted; there are no visible icons for reimbursement, for example.”
“Cassi’s layout is terrible, especially for us older folks.”
“Very complicated to navigate service providers.”
“Trying to access the financial section (statement, current fee), I can’t.”
“Very confusing, not practical or dynamic.”
“Difficult app to use; I’ve been trying since morning and can’t.”
“Terrible experience, hard access. Too much unnecessary information.”
“App doesn’t have a user-friendly interface, doesn’t comply with ANS requirements.”
“Difficult for elderly who have no experience with computing.”

“Hard to find the service I wanted; there are no visible icons for reimbursement, for example.”
“Cassi’s layout is terrible, especially for us older folks.”
“Very complicated to navigate service providers.”
“Trying to access the financial section (statement, current fee), I can’t.”
“Very confusing, not practical or dynamic.”
“Difficult app to use; I’ve been trying since morning and can’t.”
“Terrible experience, hard access. Too much unnecessary information.”
“App doesn’t have a user-friendly interface, doesn’t comply with ANS requirements.”
“Difficult for elderly who have no experience with computing.”
“Hard to find the service I wanted; there are no visible icons for reimbursement, for example.”
“Cassi’s layout is terrible, especially for us older folks.”
“Very complicated to navigate service providers.”
“Trying to access the financial section (statement, current fee), I can’t.”
“Very confusing, not practical or dynamic.”
“Difficult app to use; I’ve been trying since morning and can’t.”
“Terrible experience, hard access. Too much unnecessary information.”
“App doesn’t have a user-friendly interface, doesn’t comply with ANS requirements.”
“Difficult for elderly who have no experience with computing.”
“Hard to find the service I wanted; there are no visible icons for reimbursement, for example.”
“Cassi’s layout is terrible, especially for us older folks.”
“Very complicated to navigate service providers.”
“Trying to access the financial section (statement, current fee), I can’t.”
“Very confusing, not practical or dynamic.”
“Difficult app to use; I’ve been trying since morning and can’t.”
“Terrible experience, hard access. Too much unnecessary information.”
“App doesn’t have a user-friendly interface, doesn’t comply with ANS requirements.”
“Difficult for elderly who have no experience with computing.”
“Hard to find the service I wanted; there are no visible icons for reimbursement, for example.”
“Cassi’s layout is terrible, especially for us older folks.”
“Very complicated to navigate service providers.”
“Trying to access the financial section (statement, current fee), I can’t.”
“Very confusing, not practical or dynamic.”
“Difficult app to use; I’ve been trying since morning and can’t.”
“Terrible experience, hard access. Too much unnecessary information.”
“App doesn’t have a user-friendly interface, doesn’t comply with ANS requirements.”
“Difficult for elderly who have no experience with computing.”

Research & Discovery

I developed a hybrid methodology combining large-scale quantitative analysis with qualitative insights. I collected 1,000 comments from the Play Store and used AI for categorization — processing a volume that would be impossible to analyze manually.

Methodology

Automated collection: 1000 Play Store reviews (2022–2024)
AI categorization: Interface, Usability, Technical Issues, Support
Multidimensional analysis: Rating + NPS sentiment + thematic categories
Qualitative validation: observational walkthroughs with users

Automated collection: 1000 Play Store reviews (2022–2024)
AI categorization: Interface, Usability, Technical Issues, Support
Multidimensional analysis: Rating + NPS sentiment + thematic categories
Qualitative validation: observational walkthroughs with users

Automated collection: 1000 Play Store reviews (2022–2024)
AI categorization: Interface, Usability, Technical Issues, Support
Multidimensional analysis: Rating + NPS sentiment + thematic categories
Qualitative validation: observational walkthroughs with users

Key Insights

67% of negative comments = navigation problems
Reimbursement mentioned over 240 times as top frustration
Offline membership card = most requested feature
Users 50+ = 78% of usability complaints

Design Process

I established four guiding principles: Generational Inclusion, Contextual Clarity, Efficiency without Complexity, and Trust. Navigation was reorganized from 5 to 4 tabs via card sorting based on frequency of use found in the comments.

Technical Foundations

Architecture: 5 → 4 tabs (20% reduction in complexity)
Grid: multiples of 8px for consistency
Typography: Figtree 16px+ (optimized for 65+)
Colors: updated institutional blues (WCAG AA)
Icons: Google Material Symbols
Validation: usability testing with 3 users aged 60+ in critical flows

Architecture: 5 → 4 tabs (20% reduction in complexity)
Grid: multiples of 8px for consistency
Typography: Figtree 16px+ (optimized for 65+)
Colors: updated institutional blues (WCAG AA)
Icons: Google Material Symbols
Validation: usability testing with 3 users aged 60+ in critical flows

Architecture: 5 → 4 tabs (20% reduction in complexity)
Grid: multiples of 8px for consistency
Typography: Figtree 16px+ (optimized for 65+)
Colors: updated institutional blues (WCAG AA)
Icons: Google Material Symbols
Validation: usability testing with 3 users aged 60+ in critical flows

Iterative Process

Layout

Grid

Typography, Colors & Icons

Implemented Solutions

Reimagined Home Screen

An intelligent hub with a universal search field allowing any feature to be found via natural language. Redesigned quick access shows only the 4 most-used features, reducing visual clutter.

Universal search: natural language for any function/service
Account switcher: switch primary/dependents without logout
Quick actions: only 4 most-used features

Optimized Digital Membership Card

Modernized while keeping visual familiarity, with a QR code for providers and offline functionality to meet users’ top request.

QR code for fast scanning by service providers
Offline capability using cached data
Simplified interface: from 6 buttons to 2 (Copy + Save PDF)

Redesigned Reimbursement Flow

Turned a complex form into a wizard step-by-step with visual progress. Each screen shows only necessary information, reducing cognitive load.

Linear wizard: fewer inputs per screen
Real-time validation: prevents common errors
Contextual help: step-specific guidance

Network Search

Reimagined to remove frustration with filters. Auto-completion using participant data and a smart field for natural language.

Auto-fill using beneficiary data
Conversational AI allows natural wording (e.g. “heart doctor” → cardiologist; “near me” → uses registered address)
Toggle List/Map: clear buttons with text

Results & Impact

Implemented improvements led to a significant simplification of main flows, preserving full functionality while drastically reducing cognitive complexity for users of all age groups.

Qualitative Improvements

Inclusive design validated with users aged 60+

Clear visual hierarchy with contextual feedback

Consistent language increasing user trust

Comprehensive system ensuring future scalability

Quantifiable Metrics

67% reduction in reimbursement process steps

20% simplification in navigation (5→4 tabs)

100% WCAG AA compliance across all elements

5 steps eliminated in search through auto-completion

Initial Validation

3 target-age users showed immediate comprehension of new flows, with no confusion about navigation or essential features.

Qualitative Improvements

Inclusive design validated with users aged 60+

Clear visual hierarchy with contextual feedback

Consistent language increasing user trust

Comprehensive system ensuring future scalability

Quantifiable Metrics

67% reduction in reimbursement process steps

20% simplification in navigation (5→4 tabs)

100% WCAG AA compliance across all elements

5 steps eliminated in search through auto-completion

Next Steps

Moving forward, I intend to continue testing and refining the prototype, incorporating real user feedback and expanding features, always documenting learnings to evolve both the design and my professional practice.

In this project

UX guideline document
Design system documentation
Testing with 10+ users representative of CASSI’s demographics
Formal card sorting to validate information architecture
Design of future features: accessibility options, scheduling, personalized dashboard

In case of an official project

Eye-tracking to optimize visual hierarchy
A/B testing
AI-powered search implementation
Offline solution for membership card
Development of new features: scheduling + personalized dashboard

Main Learnings

This project demonstrated the power of large-scale quantitative analysis to identify invisible patterns. Working with real feedback from over 1,000 users provided legitimacy and a clear direction that would be impossible to achieve through manual analysis alone. In the absence of direct access to users — as in proprietary studies — this type of analysis can still provide valuable insights and guide a redesign.

Key Takeaways

Designing for 60+ benefits all users, not just the target audience
UX in healthcare requires special care, with clarity and error prevention
Research-driven design is essential for solid decisions
Inclusive design is a necessity, not a nice-to-have

Prototype Access

Let’s bring your idea to life!

View my CV

elizabethleonux@gmail.com

Chat with me on WhatsApp!