Two routes into check-in
My contributionObserved outcomeCapability: Get started
Every patient needs a route into check-in, whether or not their fingerprint is on file.
What was difficult
Fingerprint is fastest, but not everyone is enrolled and scans fail on dry skin. MRN works for everyone but is slow to type on a public screen.
Evidence at the time
Desk observation and staff interviews; usability tests in both languages, 3 rounds of 6.
Alternatives considered
- Fingerprint only: fastest, but locks out anyone not enrolled or with a failed scan.
- MRN only: works for everyone, but slow and error-prone to type.
Selected direction and trade-off
Offer both as equal choices, each with a one-line promise. After three failed fingerprint tries, offer MRN. Put a large keypad on screen with a live digit count.
Trade-off. Two routes add one decision to the first screen, in exchange for no one getting stuck.
Who did what. To confirm What I did, who set or approved the rule, and what engineering built.
Accessibility
MRN keys are 80 ร 62 px with a live digit count, finger targets are 64 px, and Submit stays disabled until 10 digits, so errors are prevented rather than reported. These are design checks.
Result and status
Observed outcome
92% of kiosk sessions pass the identity step on the first try (session logs). Fingerprint and MRN are not yet reported separately.
Open question: how often enrolled patients still choose MRN, and why.
The evidence
See the low-fi and final screens side by side, with what they do and do not prove