Patient-Centered Field Research in Medtech

Paul Charlebois and Eric Olson are seated across from each other at a white table in a modern office setting. The man on the left has curly brown hair and is wearing a light blue button-up shirt. He is smiling and looking toward the man on the right, who has short gray hair, glasses, and is wearing a dark patterned shirt with a small microphone clipped to his collar. The background is a bright, blurred open-plan office with desks and chairs, creating a soft focus effect behind the subjects. A blue pen and a blurred stack of folders or documents are on the table in the foreground.
Resources

Patient-Centered Field Research in Medtech

Sector: Surgical
YouTube video thumbnail

In this Before the Build episode, Eric Olson and Paul Charlebois reflect on the value of patient-centered field research—and how firsthand observation can reframe design priorities and impact outcomes in profound ways.

Paul shares an eye-opening story from a research session observing Mohs surgery, a specialized outpatient procedure for removing skin cancer. At first glance, the experience seemed overwhelming: patients were marked with dotted lines, then underwent facial excisions that appeared disfiguring. But over the course of the day, something deeper unfolded. The real story wasn’t just the clinical effectiveness of the surgery, but how patients experienced care, recovery, and dignity throughout the process.

The team observed how the clinic balanced harsh realities—patients with visible, temporary facial trauma waiting together in a shared space—with quiet, thoughtful design choices: no mirrors, careful pacing, and empathetic reconstruction work. These details emphasized the importance of viewing each case as more than a procedure.

Why Patient-Centered Field Research Matters

As Eric and Paul discuss, patient-centered field research often reveals more than what a design spec or user survey ever could. When engineers and developers step into real clinical environments, they can witness the emotional and procedural nuances that define patient experience. This approach can ultimately lead to better market adoption, stronger user satisfaction, and more impactful innovation.

Even when your device isn’t central to the treatment itself, being present in the broader clinical journey gives design teams critical insight into where they can reduce friction and add value.

Enjoying Before the Build? Sign up to get new episodes sent to your inbox.

Subscribe to MedTech Insights
Two people seated at a table holding handheld medical device prototypes, with text overlay reading "Is It Ready for a Human?" — MedDevice by Design episode on clinical prototypes for human use

Clinical Prototypes for Human Use: What You Need to Know

Ariana and Mark walk through what separates a clinical prototype from a proof-of-concept build, what determines how much testing and documentation you actually need, and where the regulatory line between significant risk and non-significant risk falls.

Nick and Nigel each holding a different USPTO patent certificate, illustrating the difference between a design patent and a utility patent in a Bio Break episode

Design Patent vs Utility Patent: What’s the Difference?

In this episode of Bio Break, Nick walks through both patent types after receiving two of his own in the mail, one of each, from the USPTO.

Mickey Urdea and Scott Phillips headshots for MedTech Unscripted exit strategy webinar

Built for Exit: What Drives MedTech Success

Scott Phillips sits down with Mickey Urdea to examine what actually distinguishes companies that reach commercial outcomes from those that do not.

Gloved technician handling sterile medical device packages during V&V sample testing

MD+DI: Medical Device V&V Cost and Timeline Explained

Nigel Syrotuck breaks down the realistic medical device V&V cost and schedule for terminally sterilized devices, picking up after design freeze and walking through each major phase of the process.