OSAIA Health

OSAIA

UX Audit
Web Design
Accessibility

OSAIA is a Danish clinic specialising in osteoporosis and bone health. Its site had gone live that same spring and nobody had asked for a redesign. The request was narrower and harder to fake: look at what we just built, and tell us what is actually wrong with it.

UX/UI Designer
Direct client
Audit, then redesign

Home page of the Osaia bone health site, with the opening headline beside a form to book a free pre-study.

87%
LEAVE THE BOOKING PAGE WITHOUT BOOKING ANYTHING
9
PAGES REBUILT AS THE LIVE SITE, FIXED ONLY WHERE A TICKET SAID SO
330
PEOPLE A MONTH REACH THE RISK TEST AND NEVER ANSWER QUESTION ONE

Challenges

A site that had just launched, and nobody had read it

OSAIA is Denmark’s leading clinic for osteoporosis, and its site had gone live that same spring. Nobody had asked for a redesign. The request was narrower and harder to fake: read what we just built and tell us what is actually wrong with it. The analytics said where to look. 323 people reached the booking page and 282 of them left without going anywhere, 87%, after an average of twelve seconds. 616 people opened the risk test intro and only 307 answered question one, which is roughly 330 people a month arriving at the thing the clinic most wants them to do and never starting it. Whoever does start it almost always finishes: 63% complete twenty questions.

So the problem was never the test. It was the page in front of it, and the page that asks for the call. The site also had six editorial pages, the ones built to bring in organic search, carrying canonical tags that point at URLs returning a 404, which is an instruction to Google not to index them at all, and 34 of 38 images on one page returning 404 from the clinic’s own server.

The osteoporosis page, explaining the condition above a photograph and a button to book a pre-study.

Process

OSAIA, fixed. Not OSAIA reimagined.

The work split in two on purpose: an audit priced and delivered on its own, and a redesign of whichever pages the audit pointed at, which only made sense once findings existed to justify it. Every page was captured full length in English, pasted onto a shared board, and argued with one sticky note at a time. Fifty-one notes went up first, then two more rounds, four topic passes for conversion, Nielsen’s heuristics, revenue-centric design and accessibility, and a fifty-six-note usability sweep on top. What survived five rounds of review was 154 distinct problems catalogued page by page: 87 usability, 34 conversion, 23 accessibility and 21 revenue-centric.

Then the brief changed, and it changed the whole build. Instead of a fresh interpretation, the redesign had to become a working copy of the live site, corrected only where a ticket called for it. That is harder than it sounds, because every screen then had to prove it matched something that already existed before it was allowed to differ at all. It is also what finally surfaced the clinic’s strongest asset: OSAIA runs a free companion app for patients, with its own page, and the homepage never mentioned it. Putting it there meant building a category switcher for the four condition areas, a rotating patient testimonial, and a closing band built on the app’s own store badges rather than a generic download button.

The menopause and bone health page, with an explanatory section and a note on who the service is built with.

Outcome

Nine pages measured shut, and the next stretch taken in-house

Nine pages went from the report into a full redesign, running on a design system pulled out of the site’s own kit rather than invented: 91 variables, 46 of them colour, 96.8% of fills bound to a variable rather than typed by hand, and zero contrast failures, small targets or default layer names. Nearly everything not bound to a variable is texture and photography, which was never meant to be a token. Claire Ross-Brown, from OSAIA’s own team, saw the redesigned pages and put it plainly: Love the blue and graphics. Much better than before.

In late September the client chose to take the next stretch of this work in-house. That is their call to make about their own site, it is not a verdict on what was delivered, and it does not undo the fact that the audit found 154 real problems and the redesign fixed the ones that mattered most, measured rather than estimated. What is genuinely unfinished is written down rather than smoothed over: the result page of the risk test, the six mobile screens that were never drawn, and a ticket list waiting on the client’s next version.