The deliverables we shipped for Max@Home, shown as they appear in the engagement deck. Any figures inside the slides are the client’s own reported numbers.
Case file D3 · Engagement deck
The engagement
Behind the portfolio
Home care brings several different services into one booking journey for patients and families.
Explore the homepage, service pages and mobile experience from the Max@Home website engagement.
Engagement deck
Selected slides from the client’s engagement deck — brand, website, and social deliverables. Any figures shown are the client’s own reported numbers.
Case files
Adjacent files
If you’re here, you’re probably comparing similar engagements. Here’s the surrounding work — services, problems we solved on the way, and the cities where this kind of programme runs.
Ready for your own case file?
We’ll show you the growth gap for your practice and the 90-day plan to close it.
You’ll speak with a senior strategistBehind the programme
Max@Home's programme sits in our home health care marketing work, where local SEO, Meta ads aimed at families and enquiry follow-up carry most of the load. The clinic growth guide explains the method.
For the full approach, see the home healthcare programme. To compare, read Indraprastha Apollo and Raj Hospitals; client results shows how we report every figure.
Practical notes & supporting evidence
Client contextMax@Home · Home care
Home-care platformWebsite
Public evidenceCaptioned client deliverables
Read alongsideThe source period, programme scope and your own practice baseline
Max@Home — Website development is filed in the home care collection. The engagement record identifies home-care platform as Website and build as UX + Dev. Its published window is Engagement deck. These details establish the scope available for public inspection. Read them alongside the client-specific material on this page when assessing whether the example relates to your own brief.
Home care brings several different services into one booking journey for patients and families. Explore the homepage, service pages and mobile experience from the Max@Home website engagement. The material can be inspected directly in the gallery or source-report section above. Keep each item’s caption with it when discussing the collection: the caption identifies the client and the purpose of the work shown.
The Max@Home gallery contains 8 published items. They include live website captured 14 september 2026; brand intro; about max@home; website homepage. Open the material at full size and compare the message, layout and format of the individual pieces. The artwork documents the deliverables shown, while its caption preserves the context of the original collection.
When using these materials as a reference, note the information hierarchy, the consistency of terminology and the destination of the patient action. Identify which choices belong to the client’s identity and which are transferable design principles. A new brief should use your own provider information, clinical approvals and service availability. The original artwork can support a conversation about the type of work required without supplying those details for another organisation.
Home-care and elder-care information needs to explain the type of service, where it is available and who coordinates the enquiry. Families may be comparing several practical requirements at once, so organise the content around clear service categories and contact steps. Check that the website does not imply availability the operational team cannot confirm. Care plans, suitability and clinical decisions require the appropriate service team’s assessment.
Start with the task a visitor needs to complete. Finding a treatment, checking a clinician’s background, identifying a location and asking for an appointment are related tasks, but they need different information. Make those paths visible in the navigation and on the relevant service pages. A good brief includes the content and the operational destination of each action: who receives the form, what happens after submission and how a visitor obtains help when the first contact route fails.
Desktop screens help explain page hierarchy, but they cannot establish the quality of the mobile experience. Check readable text, tap targets, menu behaviour and form validation on a phone. Long doctor biographies and treatment descriptions should remain easy to scan without hiding important details in decorative interactions. When a collection shows both desktop and mobile artwork, compare the priority of information across them. The mobile layout should preserve useful content rather than simply shrink the desktop composition.
A launch review should cover content ownership, approved contact information, working forms, redirects and the URLs that search engines are expected to index. If a site replaces an existing website, map important old pages to appropriate new destinations. Check titles, descriptions, canonicals and internal links against the actual released URLs. Keep the review list separate from the visual approval: a polished mockup does not prove that a live booking form, analytics event or redirect behaves correctly.
Document the difference between a design study, a delivered website and a live capture. A design study explains a proposed experience. A live capture records what the site looked like when it was captured. Neither alone establishes an improvement in appointment conversion. For an outcome comparison, use a defined period and consistent event definitions, then reconcile digital enquiries with attended appointments where the practice can do so. Performance and accessibility checks should be repeatable after future content edits, not only at the first launch.
