Three booking routes feeding three separate systems leave a new patient guessing which one shows the truth. Choose one route that reads the real calendar, keep the phone number visible, and keep the form for questions.

The site

A physiotherapy clinic with four physiotherapists and a registered massage therapist, on the second floor of a medical building in a suburban town centre.

Its home page offers three ways to book. A green Book online button opens a booking service on another domain, a Request an appointment link leads to a form, and the clinic's phone number is in the header.

Each route leads somewhere different. The booking service keeps its own calendar, the form arrives as an email in a shared inbox, and the phone reaches the front desk, which works from the clinic's scheduling software.

Nobody designed it that way. Each route was added in a different year, to solve a different problem.

The inference a visitor makes

Someone looking for a first appointment wants to know two things: when they can be seen, and how to secure that time.

Three routes suggest three different processes. The visitor wonders whether booking online is a real booking, whether the form is quicker, and whether phoning would find an earlier time.

So they try the online button, which shows no openings this week. The conclusion is reasonable and wrong: the clinic is full.

The front desk had three openings that week. The visitor booked at a clinic down the road.

Where each route leads

The first does the most damage, because it looks the most certain. A visitor who sees a calendar trusts it, and this one shows only the slots the desk remembered to release.

A calendar that is not the calendar

The booking service was set up two years ago, when the scheduling software at the desk could not take online bookings. The two have never been connected.

To avoid double bookings, the desk releases a few slots to the online calendar each week and copies online bookings into its own software each morning.

So the online calendar always shows less availability than the clinic has. In a busy week it shows none, while cancellations at the desk go unfilled.

The route that looks most authoritative is the one with the least information behind it.

Practitioners missing online

Only two of the five practitioners appear in the online service. The others joined after it was set up, and nobody added them.

A visitor referred to a particular physiotherapist by name searches the list, does not find them, and concludes they have left.

Appointment types set a second trap. The service lists an initial assessment and a treatment visit without saying which a new patient needs, so some book the shorter one and arrive for a slot too short for a first visit.

A form that promises a callback

The request form asks for a preferred day and time and a description of the problem, and promises a call within one business day.

It is a request, not a booking. The visitor leaves without a time, and the callback often arrives while they are at work.

It also collects health details into an ordinary shared inbox, which is more than the clinic needs before a first conversation, in a place nobody chose for keeping them.

The phone is the real system

The only route with the true calendar behind it is the phone. On a computer the number is in the header; on a phone it is inside the menu, behind an icon.

The desk is staffed during clinic hours apart from lunch, and the voicemail greeting does not say when calls will be returned.

So the most reliable route is the least visible one on the device most new patients use.

The listing sends people elsewhere

Many new patients meet the clinic on its Google listing before they ever see its home page. The listing's appointment link still points to an old address at the booking service.

That address now opens a page saying the account cannot be found. Someone who tapped it from a search on their phone meets a dead end before seeing anything the clinic made.

Links outside the website are the easiest to forget, because nobody at the clinic ever uses them.

A worked example

The owner noticed the problem when a new patient mentioned at her first visit that she had nearly gone elsewhere, because the website showed nothing free.

She tried booking on her own phone the way a new patient would, through each route in turn, and wrote down what happened at every step.

The scheduling software at the desk had since added online booking of its own, connected to the calendar the desk already uses. The clinic switched it on for every practitioner and every appointment type.

The home page now has one button, Book an appointment, leading there. Appointment types are labelled first visit and follow-up visit, with the length beside each.

The phone number sits beside the button as text, tappable on a phone, with the hours it is answered. The form became Ask a question, and no longer asks about health.

Every link to the old service, on the site, the Google listing and the clinic's emails, was replaced before its subscription was cancelled.

The counter-case within the site

Some clinics genuinely need more than one route.

Appointments that depend on paperwork first, such as some insurance claims, may need a call before anything is booked, and a short line saying so beats forcing them through the online calendar.

Some patients will always prefer to phone, which is why the number belongs beside the button rather than behind a menu.

But a site should have one main route reading the real calendar, with any second route labelled with who it is for.

What to change

  1. Book a test appointment through every route.
  2. Find which system holds the real calendar.
  3. Use its own online booking if it has one.
  4. Put every practitioner and type online.
  5. Label first visits plainly, with lengths.
  6. Show the phone number as tappable text.
  7. Keep the form for questions only.

Step two decides everything else. Once the clinic knows which system holds the truth, every button, link and listing can point to it, and the other routes can go.

Another site where a third-party service decides what visitors see is a contractor site built from an Instagram feed.

Frequently asked questions

Why do three booking routes lose patients?

Each suggests a different process, and the visitor has to guess which one shows real availability. A wrong guess, such as an empty online calendar, sends them elsewhere.

Why did the online calendar show nothing free?

It was a separate system, given only the slots the desk released each week. The real calendar at the desk had openings it never showed.

Which booking route should a clinic keep?

The one that reads the real calendar, usually online booking built into the scheduling software the desk already uses, with every practitioner and appointment type included.

Should the phone number stay on the site?

Yes, beside the booking button as tappable text, with the hours it is answered. Some patients will always prefer to call, and some appointments need a conversation first.

What should happen to the request form?

Keep it for questions only, without asking for health details. A booking request that promises a callback leaves the visitor without a time.

How should appointment types be labelled?

In words a new patient understands, such as first visit and follow-up visit, with the length beside each, so nobody books a slot that is too short.

West Coast Media Solutions Inc. provides web design, web development, hosting, digital marketing, and business consulting to organisations across Canada, drawing on more than twenty-five years in the field.

Several ways to book on your site?

Book a test appointment through each one this week. We will help you choose the route that reads the real calendar.

Start a Conversation