The quote
Embarrassed, calculating, reluctant to ask.
Show a monthly figure, computed from the practice’s own rules.
Case study 04Patient financing
CareTab
Turns a treatment price into a monthly plan, inside the dental practice. For front-desk staff and the families who pay.
- RoleCreative Director, UX/UI Design Lead
- Year2025
- PlatformPractice app and patient portal
- StatusIn development. Not yet published.
A design case study, redrawn from my development screens with synthetic data. Click anything to take over.
01The number
A treatment plan lands with a price on it.
Maria’s dentist recommends Invisalign. Her father Alex will be the one paying.
Scenario and figures are illustrative. Alex and Maria are not real people.
02The gap
Care is often declined for cost, not for need.
21%
of US adults delayed or went without dental care because of cost in 2023
63%
could cover a $400 emergency expense with cash or its equivalent in 2025. The other 37% would borrow, sell something or go without.
#1
reason patients avoided necessary dental care: they could not afford it. Insurance second, unwillingness to spend third.
A $5,000 treatment plan is far past a $400 surprise.
The 37% is my arithmetic from the Federal Reserve’s 63%. The three figures measure different things in different years and are not one survey.
03The approach
Keep the plan in the practice, and make the rules the practice’s own.
01
The person who pays is not always the patient.
Every screen keeps the guarantor, who signs and pays, apart from the patient.
02
Rules live in settings, not in the form.
Staff choose three things. The rest is computed.
03
The system recommends. A person decides.
Approve and Decline stay with staff.
Design intentions read from the screens, not measured results. The product is in development.
04The journey
One plan. Four moments of doubt.
The consent
Wary. Who sees this?
A separate, plain request the guarantor agrees to on their own phone.
The signature
Unsure what they are committing to.
Sign digitally or on paper, with one clear status for the practice.
Month three
Anxious, or avoiding the message.
Late items in plain words, with a path to fix the card.
A design model of what each person is carrying, not measured data. It plays on its own; select a moment to hold it.
05Plan builder
Seven steps to a plan. Three choices from staff.
Try it. On Plan details, change the treatment, down payment and term. On Credit check, pick a score. Sample rates, not real offers.
7
steps, each one job
From the development screens
3
choices made by staff on the plan screen
Treatment, down payment, term
0
numbers typed in for rate, charge or payment
Computed from Settings
Previous loans come firstA late amount from an earlier plan shows in red before anyone looks at a score.
Two honest ways to signDocusign, or print, sign and upload. The practice sees one status.
The card comes lastSo a plan is never left half-built with money on the line.
The calculator is my illustration: simple interest on the financed amount, using the sample matrix in Settings. The product’s real formula is not shown on the screens.
06Credit-check handoff
Two people, two screens, one consent.
Staff cannot tick “consent” for someone else.
Send the request, tick the box on the phone, press I agree, then ask for the score. Try pressing I agree without ticking.
A soft checkIt does not lower a credit score; hard checks can. Asking about a plan should not cost a family anything.Weave: in-house financing
Decline is a button, not a flowA declined applicant is owed a notice with reasons, or the right to ask. That is the screen I would design next.12 CFR 1002.9
Synthetic data. Not legal advice.
07Patient portal
A plan with no card on file is a plan at risk.
One tinted row. One button. Then active.
Press Add payment method, then Save. Synthetic data.
Card or Cash App Pay, saved through StripeStripe documents Link as a wallet that saves and autofills payment details, so a family can pay the way they already do.Stripe docs: Link
Late payments in plain wordsA late fee column and a path to fix the card.
Which payment methods CareTab enables is as shown on the screens.
08Settings
The most important screen is the one patients never see.
Change a rate here and every new plan follows.
Pick a term, select a cell, nudge the rate, then run a plan in the builder above. It reads the same matrix.
One source of truthThe matrix crosses amount, credit score and term. Staff never type a rate, so two people cannot quote two numbers.
A rate change should leave a recordThe screens show Save Changes and no history. I would add an audit line beside it.
All rates are sample values for this page. They are not CareTab’s real rates and are not an offer.
09How I checked
Money is regulated. The interface has to know it.
28 screens, read as a workflowWho does what, in which order, and what each screen assumes the last one produced.
Regulation ZA practice that finances in-house can be a creditor. Disclosures centre on amount financed, finance charge, APR and total of payments.12 CFR 1026.2 · 1026.18
Regulation BA declined applicant is owed a notice within 30 days, with specific reasons or the right to ask.12 CFR 1002.9
How the market does itLenders such as Sunbit sit inside practice software. In-house keeps the plan with the practice, usually behind a soft check.CareStack and Sunbit
Not done yetNo test with front-desk staff, no patient interviews, no legal review, no usage data.
I am a designer, not a lawyer. Not legal advice. The critique comes from reading the screens against public standards, not from users.
10Brand & system
Plum for trust, magenta for the next step.
A financing product has to feel like a clinic, not a bank branch.
The login screen, redrawn as vector. The wordmark is my redraw, not the master logo.
Hero artwork for the case-study card on my home page.
- One action colour, magenta
- Teal and mint only say a plan is healthy
- White-label is a token swap
#5D375EPlum
#B6558BMagenta
#F6EFF5Tint
#F0F1F5Page
#5EBCB5Teal
#E0F2E6Mint
#E2E3F8Lavender
#DBDBDBTrack
Colours are sampled from my development screens, not from a brand guide.
11Judgement
What I’d defend, and what I’d change.
- Defend · computed, read-only plan fields
- Defend · consent on the guarantor’s own device
Several text colours miss WCAG AA.
Five measure 2.08 to 4.20 against the 4.5 needed. White on the magenta button passes at 4.51. Adjusted: 4.9 to 6.5.
Show the cost of the credit.
Amount financed, finance charge, APR and total of payments, on the plan and in the agreement.
Design the declined path.
Reasons, or a way to ask, and something to offer next.
Say what the card will be charged and when.
Before the Save button, not in the agreement.
Contrast from sampled hex values, WCAG 2.1 formula. Compliance points are design observations, not legal advice; counsel confirms which rules apply to each practice.
12Status
In development. No claims yet.
Designed in 2025, not yet published. No users, outcomes or numbers exist, so this page reports none.
Not yet publishedTest first
- Can a new staff member build a plan unaided?
- Do guarantors understand the consent request?
- Does a monthly figure first change the answer? A hypothesis.
- The declined and late paths
Measure if it ships
- Accepted plans
- Time to a saved card
- Missed payments recovered
Candidates only. Nothing here has been measured.
Compute it, do not ask for it.
Consent belongs to the person giving it.
Design the declined path.
Make the number something a family can plan around.
Sources: Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker, Federal Reserve, Dental Economics, CFPB Reg Z, CFPB Reg B, Weave, FinTech Futures, Stripe. Product screens are reconstructions I drew for this page, using synthetic data. Not legal advice. WCAG 2.1 AA targeted, keyboard operable demos, motion off under reduced-motion.