Auburn Hospital UX case study
- Humanics Collective
- Jun 29
- 3 min read
Testing signage comprehension in one of Australia’s most linguistically diverse hospitals.
Client: NSW Health Infrastructure
Location: Auburn Hospital, New South Wales, Australia
Project scope: User research, signage strategy, UX testing, health literacy evaluation
Creating clarity under pressure
In a hospital, signs are more than labels. They're often the first—and sometimes only—interface between a person in distress and the help they need. But in environments like Auburn Hospital, where over 80 languages are spoken and many visitors are unfamiliar with healthcare systems, signage carries a particularly heavy load.
We were engaged by NSW Health Infrastructure to help update Auburn’s signage system. Rather than relying on assumptions or best guesses, we ran a structured, real-world comprehension study—testing whether proposed terms and pictograms actually made sense to the people using them.
This wasn’t abstract research. The goal was simple: reduce confusion, improve clarity, and support better experiences for patients, carers, visitors, and staff.
What we wanted to find out
We focused on three questions:
How do people interpret the language used on hospital signs?
Are common healthcare pictograms actually understood by a broad public?
What alternatives could make signage clearer, quicker to act on, and easier to trust?
We also explored an emerging fourth theme: how emotional and cognitive stress interacts with signage comprehension in real-world hospital conditions.
Testing in context
We conducted a three-day intercept study at two high-traffic public areas in Auburn Hospital: the main reception foyer and the café near Outpatients. Participants were shown flashcards featuring proposed signage terms or pictograms and asked:
“What do you think this means?”
“If you saw this on a sign, would you know where to go?”
“Is there a clearer word or image that would make this easier for you?”
We recorded open-ended responses and observed hesitation, body language, gaze, and tone to understand not just what people said, but how they reacted.
The methodology drew on UX research practices and symbol testing protocols (including elements of AS 2342–1992), combining qualitative insights with structured response logging.
Who we spoke to
31 participants took part, reflecting the real mix of Auburn’s community:
Ages ranged from 22 to 79
19 spoke English as a second language
Languages included Arabic, Vietnamese, Cantonese, Dari, Hindi, Turkish, Tamil, and Samoan
Participants included patients, carers, volunteers, and visitors
Some interviews were supported by informal interpreters. We prioritised respectful, culturally sensitive engagement throughout.
What we found
Terminology
Ambulatory Care was widely misunderstood—commonly associated with ambulances or walking aids
Allied Health confused almost everyone; some assumed it referred to military or security services
Outpatients was often interpreted as people leaving the hospital, but with little clarity on the function
Discharge Lounge was misread as a place for receiving bad news
Main Reception and Information were assumed to be different places, not a single desk
Participants suggested terms like “Clinic,” “Appointments,” or “Doctor Waiting Area” as more intuitive alternatives.
Pictograms
Universal symbols (Toilets, Lifts, Stairs) worked well
The icon for Outpatients (a stylised figure with a clipboard) was misread as pharmacy or file collection
The icon for Allied Health (abstract human forms) was often ignored or misinterpreted
Participants favoured literal images over abstract icons, especially under stress.
What it means for design
The testing revealed three clear behavioural patterns:
Cognitive friction increased with unfamiliar terms or abstract visuals—people paused, guessed, or ignored signs entirely
Stress influenced interpretation—nervous laughter, looking around for cues, and low confidence were common
Environmental alignment mattered—users relied heavily on architectural context and visible human cues
Signage that required interpretation slowed people down. Signage that offered recognition helped them move with confidence.
Real-world changes, real-world value
This wasn’t testing for testing’s sake. The results directly informed the signage redesign:
Outpatients was replaced with clearer terms like “Appointments” or “Clinics”
Allied Health was removed from public signage and replaced with named services like “Physiotherapy” or “Speech Pathology”
Abstract pictograms were dropped in favour of literal ones
Main Reception and Information were merged into a single, clearly named point
A terminology guide was created to support translation and consistent staff usage
These changes were implemented before production—saving cost, confusion, and rework.
The takeaway
User experience in hospitals isn’t shaped by grand gestures. It’s shaped by small, repeated interactions. Signage is one of the only tools that touches every single user.
This project showed how quick, respectful testing with a real community can deliver powerful improvements. In just a few days, we uncovered problems, validated changes, and helped shape a system that works better for everyone.
Getting it right matters. Especially here.
