Competency, not
just completion.
myhealthPD, working with subject-matter provider NurseWest, needed a bundle of obstetric competency courses that maternity clinicians would genuinely learn from — not click through. Each topic carried real clinical weight, and the content had to be accurate, current and defensible.
The three courses sat at different depths: a focused breastfeeding module, a more involved session on epidural and spinal analgesia, and an extended neonatal resuscitation course. All needed to feel like one coherent programme while respecting the demands of each subject.
The remit covered the full build — research and content authoring with SMEs, instructional design, custom visuals, interactivity, accessibility and SCORM packaging for the LMS.
Three courses,
one system.
Selected screens.
On-brand mockups — illustrative of the build style, not client screenshots.
How it came together.
The three courses were designed as one programme with a shared visual language and interaction model, so a clinician moving between them never had to relearn the interface. Each course opened by framing the clinical relevance — why this matters at the bedside — before moving into content, practice and assessment.
Content was authored alongside NurseWest's subject-matter experts and checked for currency and accuracy. Because the studio is clinically grounded, that review was a genuine dialogue rather than a one-way handover, which kept revision cycles tight.
Interactivity was matched to each subject. Breastfeeding leaned on labelled diagrams and guided reveals to build recognition; epidural and spinal analgesia used sequencing and safety-check interactions where order and omission matter; neonatal resuscitation used branching decision points so clinicians felt the consequences of each choice under time pressure.
Visually, custom diagrams and iconography replaced stock imagery, all built to a single accessible palette and type system. Motion was used sparingly — to direct attention and signal feedback — and every interaction had an accessible alternative.
The biggest challenge was depth versus consistency: three subjects of very different size needed to feel like one bundle without flattening the most complex into the simplest. The fix was a shared scaffold — consistent navigation, feedback and assessment patterns — with room for each course to scale its interactivity to the content.
Accessibility on richer interactions also took care: branching scenarios and timed decisions were built to remain operable by keyboard and screen reader, and to respect reduced-motion preferences, so no learner was excluded from the hardest, most valuable parts of the course.