Dr. Jen Sonney at the University of Washington’s School of Nursing had developed a prototype for a new asthma management app (IMPACT) in collaboration with children with asthma and their parents. She wanted to take the app to market but needed some help. As a sole researcher for this project I conducted:

• user and stakeholder interviews
• competitive analysis
• customer segmentation

Result

I delivered a concrete 6 year product design and funding strategy based on extensive user and stakeholder research and product and industry analysis. Based on my research, I also suggested key MVP (minimum viable product) requirements and constraints that can guide further development of the prototype.

Key Research Objectives and Approaches

• In healthcare, who buys and who pays for this type of technology varies and are often not the user -> Spend extra time getting to know the ecosystem and who’s involved
• FDA approval is expensive and time consuming -> Investigate if FDA approval is needed and if so what the specific impact will be on commercialization

These objectives gave rise to the following key questions and approach:

Methodology

1. User Interview Review

Purpose

The goal was to understand the motivation behind the creation of the IMPACT app and who needed it. Dr. Sonney’s team had already gathered data from interviews and usability studies, but the task was to recontextualize the findings in a business context using the lean business canvas.

Method

I reviewed and coded interview data from 10 interviews with parents and children into categories outlining pain points, existing asthma management behavior and existing tools that users use. Further, I reviewed and coded data from the usability studies into categorizes that highlight the advantages of, improvements to and usage of the IMPACT app.

Outcome

Through this qualitative exercise, it was evident that there was a real customer problem, and the outcome helped in developing the prototype’s initial unique value proposition.

2. Stakeholder Interviews

Purpose

After determining the initial value proposition of IMPACT, the next step was to determine whether there is a market for IMPACT and who would be willing to pay for it, ideally with insurance reimbursement. Additionally, I needed to find out if FDA approval was necessary for IMPACT. To get answers to these questions, I sought out experts and individuals with relevant experience.

Method

I opted to carry out stakeholder interviews to gain insights into IMPACT’s reception by its various stakeholders. I reached out to some stakeholders within my personal and professional networks, and approached others via cold emails. Following this, I created an interview script and proceeded to conduct interviews with a total of 18 participants from diverse stakeholder groups.

Outcome

The outcomes of my research revealed that going through the FDA may not be necessary for IMPACT since it is a low-risk digital health product that does not make any claims around treatment and diagnosis. Moreover, seeking FDA approval may not be a wise use of resources because statistical significance does not necessarily translate to business significance.

However, for IMPACT to be reimbursed by insurance, it needs to be classified as a medical device under the FDA, which requires approval. To address this, alternative sales strategies were considered, such as selling IMPACT directly to parents through retailers like Amazon or hospitals and clinics selling it to their patients.

It was also discovered that selling to larger hospital systems would require extensive proof points around efficacy, including studies, data collection, and integration with electronic health records. Due to the significant resources needed to pursue this avenue, smaller hospitals and clinics and parents were identified as potential customers for IMPACT.

3. Surveys

Purpose

The purpose of my research was to determine the viability of selling IMPACT to parents and smaller hospitals and clinics. To achieve this, I needed to explore whether they would be willing to purchase IMPACT and at what price point. Additionally, I wanted to identify any reasons why they may choose not to buy it.

To obtain this information, I planned to gather insights from parents of school-aged children with asthma and pediatricians. As a first step, I decided to conduct a survey because it is a quick, anonymous, and efficient way to gather substantial data on a few critical points.

Method

To ensure a comprehensive and reliable dataset, I adopted a mixed methods approach, which included a combination of open-ended questions and ordinal 5-point Likert Scale questions. I conducted a pilot test of the surveys on a few acquaintances to ensure that they could be completed within three minutes. To maximize the survey’s reach, I shared it through relevant Facebook and LinkedIn groups, as well as via cold emails sent to individuals and organizations.

Outcome

The outcome of my survey approach was disappointing, as I did not receive any responses to either survey. As a result, it became apparent that a different strategy was needed to gather insights on the viability of selling IMPACT to parents and smaller hospitals and clinics.

4. Evaluative Interviews

Purpose

To gather insights on the viability of selling IMPACT to parents and smaller hospitals and clinics, I decided to switch to an interview approach after my initial survey failed to yield any responses. However, I encountered challenges while identifying suitable participants. Initially, I avoided reaching out to Dr. Sonney’s participants as they were a biased group who had received monetary incentives to participate in the study. However, I later realized that the interviews conducted by Dr. Sonney’s team were in the context of usability research, whereas my focus was on understanding whether parents would be interested in purchasing IMPACT. I decided to interview the parents from Dr. Sonney’s study because she already had a relationship with these participants, they were easier to reach and more willing ot be interviewed. I also cold-emailed pediatricians in my area for interviews.

Method

To gain insights into the potential customers’ perspectives on IMPACT, I conducted interviews with 4 participants, consisting of 2 parents and 2 providers. The parents were chosen because they had already used the app for a few months, allowing them to provide in-depth feedback on their experience with IMPACT.

Outcome

The outcome of the interviews with potential customers was positive overall. The two parents who had used the app were enthusiastic about it and expressed their willingness to pay for it if it was available off the shelf. They had also suggested some design improvements during the usability studies. On the other hand, the pediatricians were more cautious and wanted to ensure the app’s usefulness. They emphasized that the app should not add more data analysis to their job and preferred a solution that easily integrated into their existing workflow. This feedback provided valuable insights for Dr. Sonney’s team.

5. Secondary Research

Purpose

I conducted market and competitive analysis alongside the interviews and surveys. The purpose of this analysis was to gain insights into IMPACT’s product and business roadmap.

Method

To gain insight into IMPACT’s product and business roadmap, I conducted market and competitive analysis on approximately 20 competitors. I categorized these competitors into three stages, including early-stage competitors similar to IMPACT, mid-stage competitors approximately five years down the road, and late-stage competitors represented by larger corporations. Then, I analyzed these competitors based on three quadrants, including product features, pricing models, and the customers they cater to.

Outcome

The outcome of the market and competitive analysis was to develop a pricing model for IMPACT and conduct a SWOT analysis of the app. By analyzing the competition, the team was able to identify a suitable pricing model that would appeal to the target customer base. Additionally, by conducting a SWOT analysis, the team was able to identify necessary versus “good to have” features for the app, which could inform future product development decisions.

Impact

This fellowship yielded significant outcomes, as I transformed IMPACT from a research product to a potentially market-ready solution. I achieved this by:

• Identifying parents and providers as the ideal target customers for IMPACT, effectively communicating this to Dr. Sonney and paving the way for successful product development.
• Providing compelling, evidence-based arguments against seeking regulatory approval, which ultimately saved valuable time and resources.
• Determining the necessary design requirements and constraints for creating a Minimum Viable Product (MVP), ensuring a successful potential product.
• Offering valuable design recommendations for optimizing IMPACT for providers.
• Creating a comprehensive “best case” 6-year commercialization plan for IMPACT, including recommendations for various funding options, setting the groundwork for long-term success.

Learnings

My experience in this fellowship provided an incredible opportunity for me to gain extensive knowledge about designing and scaling technology in the mobile health industry, specifically when working within regulatory constraints. In my reflection, I have organized my learnings about the industry and highlighted some key takeaways.

One significant learning was the importance of persistence, especially when faced with challenges. For instance, when the survey method failed to produce the desired results despite reaching out to audiences through social media and personal networks, I realized the value of pursuing alternative methods like evaluative interviews. This decision turned out to be a blessing in disguise, as it helped me identify gaps in my survey questions and iterate over survey design for future use.

Although this project was not solely focused on product design, it provided me with a great perspective on how business goals can drive product goals and vice versa. This understanding has given me a broader outlook on product development and helped me appreciate the interdependence between business and product objectives.