Download PDF
Appl Clin Inform 2017; 08(03): 754-762
DOI: 10.4338/ACI-2017-03-CR-0040
Research Article
Schattauer GmbH

Conversion of Provider EMR Training from Instructor-Led Training to eLearning at an Academic Medical Center

Karen Sharp
2   The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Clinical Applications, Columbus, Ohio, United States
,
Michele Williams
2   The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Clinical Applications, Columbus, Ohio, United States
,
Alison Aldrich
1   The Ohio State University, Department of Family Medicine, Columbus, Ohio, United States
,
Adrienne Bogacz
2   The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Clinical Applications, Columbus, Ohio, United States
,
Sighle Denier
3   The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Education, Development & Resources, Columbus, Ohio, United States
,
Ann S. McAlearney
1   The Ohio State University, Department of Family Medicine, Columbus, Ohio, United States
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received: 07 March 2016

accepted in revised form: 11 May 2017

Publication Date:
20 December 2017 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Summary

This case study overviews the conversion of provider training of the electronic medical record (EMR) from an instructor-led training (ILT) program to eLearning at an Academic Medical Center (AMC). This conversion provided us with both a useful training tool and the opportunity to maximize efficiency within both our training and optimization team and organization. eLearning Development Principles were created and served as a guide to assist us with designing an eLearning curriculum using a five step process. The result was a new training approach that allowed learners to complete training at their own pace, and even test out of sections based on demonstrated competency. The information we have leads us to believe that a substantial return on our investment can be obtained from the conversion with positive impacts that have served as the foundation for the future of end user EMR training at our AMC.

Citation: Sharp K, Williams M, Aldrich A, Bogacz A, Denier S, McAlearney AS. Conversion of Provider EMR Training from Instructor Led Training to eLearning at an Academic Medical Center. Appl Clin Inform 2017; 8: 754–762 https://doi.org/10.4338/ACI-2017-03-CR-0040

Keywords

Electronic health records and systems - Knowledge translation - Internet and the Web technology - Strategies for health IT training - Employee orientation program

Clinical Relevance Statement

Converting provider EMR training to an eLearning format has the potential to increase learner satisfaction while yielding considerable savings to the organization in terms of cost and clinical time savings.


Protection of Human Subjects

This activity did not involve research on human subjects.


 

  • References

  • 1 Joseph S, Sow M, Furukawa MF, Posnack S, Chaffee MA. HITECH spurs EHR vendor competition and innovation, resulting in increased adoption. The American journal of managed care 2014; 20 (09) 734-40.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology.. Update on the adoption of health information technology and related efforts to facilitate the electronic use and exchange of health information. 2016 [cited 2016 January 5]; Available from: https://dashboard.healthit.gov/report-to-congress/2015-update-adoption-health-information-technology.php
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Iveroth E, Fryk P, Rapp B. Information technology strategy and alignment issues in health care organizations. Health care management review 2013; 38 (03) 188-200.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Lapointe L, Rivard S. A Multilevel Model of Resistance to Information Technology Implementation. MIS Quarterly 2005; 29 (03) 461-91.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Boonstra A, Broekhuis M. Barriers to the acceptance of electronic medical records by physicians from systematic review to taxonomy and interventions. BMC health services research 2010; 10: 231.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Kaplan B, Harris-Salamone KD. Health IT success and failure: recommendations from literature and an AMIA workshop. JAMIA 2009; 16 (03) 291-9.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Kruse CS, Regier V, Rheinboldt KT. Barriers over time to full implementation of health information exchange in the United States. JMIR medical informatics 2014; 2 (02) e26.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Mennemeyer ST, Menachemi N, Rahurkar S, Ford EW. Impact of the HITECH Act on physicians’ adoption of electronic health records. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA 2016; 23 (02) 375-9.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Miller RH, Sim I. Physicians’ use of electronic medical records: barriers and solutions. Health affairs (Project Hope) 2004; 23 (02) 116-26.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Anderson LK, Stafford CJ. The „big bang“ implementation: not for the faint of heart. Computers in nursing 2002; 20 (Suppl. 01) 14-20. quiz –2.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Bredfeldt CE, Awad EB, Joseph K, Snyder MH. Training providers: beyond the basics of electronic health records. BMC health services research 2013; 13: 503.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Lorenzi NM, Kouroubali A, Detmer DE, Bloomrosen M. How to successfully select and implement electronic health records (EHR) in small ambulatory practice settings. BMC medical informatics and decision making 2009; 9: 15.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Terry AL, Thorpe CF, Giles G, Brown JB, Harris SB, Reid GJ, Thind A, Stewart M. Implementing electronic health records: Key factors in primary care. Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien 2008; 54 (05) 730-6.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Whittaker AA, Aufdenkamp M, Tinley S. Barriers and facilitators to electronic documentation in a rural hospital. Journal of nursing scholarship: an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing 2009; 41 (03) 293-300.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Carr DM. A team approach to EHR implementation and maintenance. Nursing management 2004; 35 (Suppl. 05) 15-6 24.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Dastagir MT, Chin HL, McNamara M, Poteraj K, Battaglini S, Alstot L. Advanced proficiency EHR training: effect on physicians’ EHR efficiency, EHR satisfaction and job satisfaction. AMIA Annual Symposium proceedings AMIA Symposium 2012; 2012: 136-43.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Nicklaus J, Kusser J, Zessin J, Amaya M. Transforming Education for Electronic Health Record Implementation. Journal of continuing education in nursing 2015; 46 (08) 359-63.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Fleming NS, Culler SD, McCorkle R, Becker ER, Ballard DJ. The financial and nonfinancial costs of implementing electronic health records in primary care practices. Health affairs (Project Hope) 2011; 30 (03) 481-9.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Jimenez A. E-learning supports EHR implementations. In addition to meaningful use, we need to define meaningful training. Health management technology 2010; 31 (11) 22-3.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Peck AD. EHR implementation: training pays dividends. Medical economics 2013; 90 (14) 53-6.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Macdonald CJ, Stodel EJ, Chambers LW. An online interprofessional learning resource for physicians, pharmacists, nurse practitioners, and nurses in long-term care: benefits, barriers, and lessons learned. Informatics for health & social care 2008; 33 (01) 21-38.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Bramble WJ, Panda SK. Economics of distance and online learning: theory, practice, and research. New York:: Routledge; 2008
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Bentley T, Rizer M, McAlearney AS, Mekhjian H, Siedler M, Sharp K. et al. The journey from precontemplation to action: Transitioning between electronic medical record systems. Health care management review 2016; 41 (01) 22-31.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Cook DA, Levinson AJ, Garside S, Dupras DM, Erwin PJ, Montori VM. Internet-based learning in the health professions: a meta-analysis. JAMA 2008; 300 (10) 1181-96.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Wutoh R, Boren SA, Balas EA. eLearning: a review of Internet-based continuing medical education. The Journal of continuing education in the health professions 2004; 24 (01) 20-30.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Curran VR, Fleet LJ, Kirby F. A comparative evaluation of the effect of Internet-based CME delivery format on satisfaction, knowledge and confidence. BMC medical education 2010; 10: 10.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Pawson R. Internet-based medical education: a realist review of what works, for whom and in what circumstances. BMC medical education 2010; 10: 12.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Young KJ, Kim JJ, Yeung G, Sit C, Tobe SW. Physician preferences for accredited online continuing medical education. The Journal of continuing education in the health professions 2011; 31 (04) 241-6.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar