Redesigning the blood testing journey for a more patient-centric experience

One in every three Americans have knowingly avoided recommended blood screenings.¹ This is in spite of the fact that blood testing is one of the most common and indispensable procedures in modern healthcare, and that roughly 70% of medical decisions depend on laboratory tests.²

Diagnoses are missed, treatments postponed, and patient loyalty lost as a result of a blood testing process that continually discourages adherence.

These numbers also represent both a pressing issue and a notable opportunity. The logistical barriers, poor communication, and lack of comfort reported by these patients can all be remedied through targeted operational changes. The result would be a patient-centric blood testing journey that encourages responsible health screening and fosters lasting trust. 

The following guide illustrates three changes that are likely to have a direct impact on patient behavior: streamlining logistics and providing decentralized blood collection options; educating patients about the importance of blood testing and communicating their results in a clear and accessible way; and minimizing physical discomfort by adapting the testing environment and procedure.

Access and convenience

Logistical difficulties are often the first barrier that a patient must face to complete a recommended blood test. These challenges can take various forms but can be divided into two main categories: physical accessibility and scheduling.

Improved physical accessibility through decentralized testing

The physical location of a lab plays an obvious but underappreciated role in patients’ ability to have a blood test administered. The scale of the problem is corroborated by Mary Wolfe et al., reporting that 5.8 million Americans delayed medical care in 2017 because they did not have transportation.³ 

As HCOs are undoubtedly aware, healthcare organizations can expand their blood collection options beyond hospital campuses to include ambulatory settings like primary care offices, retail health sites, and community settings. These decentralized options can increase proximity to patients’ existing routines and ultimately shorten the time to diagnosis. Healthcare organizations considering such an approach should ensure that LIS/EHR systems are fully integrated, collection protocols standardized, and chain-of-custody procedures codified to ensure that procedure, transport, and documentation are handled with efficiency and due diligence.

Increased flexibility for convenient scheduling

The scheduling process is arguably the most significant logistical factor for adherence. Counterintuitive interfaces or rigid scheduling can make it exceedingly difficult for patients to secure a workable appointment in the first place, effectively nullifying any decentralization efforts.

Healthcare organizations may begin by implementing a more flexible testing schedule that allows for same-day availability. Such an open-access system has been demonstrated to significantly reduce no-show rates in a systematic review by Habibi et al.⁴ Lastly, patient perception of the patient experience can be improved with self-scheduling, mobile check-in, and text-based reminders.

Physical comfort and accommodation

Both of these factors can be directly addressed by healthcare organizations.

Alternatives to venipuncture

It is common knowledge that a very significant proportion of patients experience some form of anxiety or discomfort with venous procedures, especially among younger populations; McLenon et al. reports that 20–50% of adolescents and 20–30% of young adults exhibit a fear of needles.⁶ This is especially problematic given that younger generations are already more likely than older generations to put off recommended health screenings.¹

While venipuncture remains unavoidable in many circumstances, recent advancements in capillary blood collection technology and testing validation can make blood collection less invasive for routine blood testing. The microcollection devices, automated preparation systems, and validated testing workflows that accompany such technologies have expanded the utility of capillary samples beyond traditional glucose and hematocrit measurements, and can reduce errors and delays by automating various aspects of the collection process.

Implementing these innovations requires healthcare organizations to follow laboratory best practices. Capillary-to-venous correlation should be validated according to CLSI standards while staff are educated about test-specific limitations. Patients should be made aware of any non-venous options that are available to them. Providers should be educated about the actual specifications of the technology and scientific validation to counteract any unfounded concerns about result accuracy, unsuitability for complex panels, or hemolysis that may stem from legacy fingertip collection methods. 

Accommodating for environmental preferences

Healthcare organizations can make significant improvements to the patient experience by simply ensuring a physical environment that accommodates their needs and avoids unnecessary stressors. A systematic review by Ferreira et al. listed environmental factors like cleanliness, privacy, and comfort as significant components of patient satisfaction.⁷ Staff can be trained to inquire about and accommodate patient preferences regarding variables like temperature, lighting, or privacy. Patient surveys can also be used to inform more permanent improvements to testing locations.

Education and communication

Communication between healthcare organizations and their patients before, during, and after blood collection can have significant repercussions for the perceived urgency of testing and the perceived quality of the results.

Educating patients on the value of blood testing

American patients persistently underestimate the importance of blood testing for critical diagnoses. It is widely cited in professional circles that roughly 70% of clinical decisions rely on laboratory data, yet public awareness of this fact remains low.² Patients who remain unaware of the crucial role which blood tests can play in protecting their long-term health are naturally less likely to comply with recommended testing, even if adherence presents only minor inconveniences.

Healthcare organizations can use in-clinic, digital, or community-driven messaging to emphasize the role of blood testing for early detection of conditions like diabetes, cardiovascular disease, anemia, or kidney disease. They should also clearly demonstrate the medical and financial implications that follow when treatment for these conditions is delayed. Communicators should take care to use culturally competent language that is accessible to all target demographics.

Communicating results in a clear and accessible manner

Patients who find their test results unclear or unhelpful, who must wait a long time to access their test results, or who cannot access their results at all will ascribe little value to even a perfectly frictionless scheduling and collection process. This makes thorough, timely, and understandable communication a priority for healthcare organizations. Poor follow-up procedures have been associated with major consequences for patient care, including missed diagnoses.⁵ 

Quick delivery of results supports timely treatment and boosts patient satisfaction. A single, digitally accessible point of contact simplifies the experience, even with decentralized collection and processing. Patients naturally gravitate toward solutions that make results easy to understand through plain language, jargon-free explanations, and clear next steps alongside abnormal findings—enhancing literacy and informed choices.  

HCOs already excelling in patient friendly reports stand out, as consumers increasingly choose providers whose communications empower confident decisions. Those adapting to this trend help patients engage more actively in their care. Others may find it harder to compete as preferences shift toward clarity and accessibility.

Conclusion

A blood testing journey that is truly built around the needs of the patient has the potential to close a consequential gap between public behavior and medically recommended practice. The measures that healthcare organizations take to make blood work more accessible, clear, and comfortable will almost certainly be repaid through both the improved care of the patients and their loyalty toward the healthcare organizations that employ these measures.

References

1. 2025 Wellness Matters Survey. Aflac. Accessed December 23, 2025. https://www.aflac.com/docs/cancer-campaign-wellness-matters/aflac-wellness-matters-survey.pdf.
2. Feature Story: Celebrate Medical Laboratory Professionals Week. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. April 18, 2020. Accessed December 23, 2025. https://www.cdc.gov/lab-week/resources-archive/feature-story.html.
3. Feature Story: Celebrate Medical Laboratory Professionals Week. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. April 18, 2020. Accessed December 23, 2025. https://www.cdc.gov/lab-week/resources-archive/feature-story.html. 
4. Wolfe MK, McDonald NC, Holmes GM. Transportation barriers to health care in the United States: findings from the National Health Interview Survey, 1997–2017. Am J Public Health. 2020;110(6):815-822. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2020.305579. 
5. Mazaheri Habibi MR, Abadi FM, Tabesh H, et al. Evaluation of no-show rate in outpatient clinics with open access scheduling system: A systematic review. Health Sci Rep. 2024;7(7):e2160. doi:10.1002/hsr2.2160.
6. Callen J, Georgiou A, Li J, Westbrook JI. The impact for patient outcomes of failure to follow up on test results. How can we do better? EJIFCC. 2015;26(1):38-46.
7. McLenon J, Rogers MAM. The fear of needles: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2019;75(1):30-42. doi:10.1111/jan.13818.  
8. Ferreira DC, Vieira I, Pedro MI, Caldas P, Varela M. Patient satisfaction with healthcare services and the techniques used for its assessment: A systematic literature review and a bibliometric analysis. Healthcare (Basel). 2023;11(5):639. doi:10.3390/healthcare11050639.
9. Ferreira DC, Vieira I, Pedro MI, Caldas P, Varela M. Patient satisfaction with healthcare services and the techniques used for its assessment: A systematic literature review and a bibliometric analysis. Healthcare (Basel). 2023;11(5):639. doi:10.3390/healthcare11050639.