Cargando…

Implementation of Epic Beaker Clinical Pathology at an academic medical center

BACKGROUND: Epic Beaker Clinical Pathology (CP) is a relatively new laboratory information system (LIS) operating within the Epic suite of software applications. To date, there have not been any publications describing implementation of Beaker CP. In this report, we describe our experience in implem...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Krasowski, Matthew D., Wilford, Joseph D., Howard, Wanita, Dane, Susan K., Davis, Scott R., Karandikar, Nitin J., Blau, John L., Ford, Bradley A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4763507/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26955505
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2153-3539.175798
_version_ 1782417273704677376
author Krasowski, Matthew D.
Wilford, Joseph D.
Howard, Wanita
Dane, Susan K.
Davis, Scott R.
Karandikar, Nitin J.
Blau, John L.
Ford, Bradley A.
author_facet Krasowski, Matthew D.
Wilford, Joseph D.
Howard, Wanita
Dane, Susan K.
Davis, Scott R.
Karandikar, Nitin J.
Blau, John L.
Ford, Bradley A.
author_sort Krasowski, Matthew D.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Epic Beaker Clinical Pathology (CP) is a relatively new laboratory information system (LIS) operating within the Epic suite of software applications. To date, there have not been any publications describing implementation of Beaker CP. In this report, we describe our experience in implementing Beaker CP version 2012 at a state academic medical center with a go-live of August 2014 and a subsequent upgrade to Beaker version 2014 in May 2015. The implementation of Beaker CP was concurrent with implementations of Epic modules for revenue cycle, patient scheduling, and patient registration. METHODS: Our analysis covers approximately 3 years of time (2 years preimplementation of Beaker CP and roughly 1 year after) using data summarized from pre- and post-implementation meetings, debriefings, and the closure document for the project. RESULTS: We summarize positive aspects of, and key factors leading to, a successful implementation of Beaker CP. The early inclusion of subject matter experts in the design and validation of Beaker workflows was very helpful. Since Beaker CP does not directly interface with laboratory instrumentation, the clinical laboratories spent extensive preimplementation effort establishing middleware interfaces. Immediate challenges postimplementation included bar code scanning and nursing adaptation to Beaker CP specimen collection. The most substantial changes in laboratory workflow occurred with microbiology orders. This posed a considerable challenge with microbiology orders from the operating rooms and required intensive interventions in the weeks following go-live. In postimplementation surveys, pathology staff, informatics staff, and end-users expressed satisfaction with the new LIS. CONCLUSIONS: Beaker CP can serve as an effective LIS for an academic medical center. Careful planning and preparation aid the transition to this LIS.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4763507
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47635072016-03-07 Implementation of Epic Beaker Clinical Pathology at an academic medical center Krasowski, Matthew D. Wilford, Joseph D. Howard, Wanita Dane, Susan K. Davis, Scott R. Karandikar, Nitin J. Blau, John L. Ford, Bradley A. J Pathol Inform Technical Note BACKGROUND: Epic Beaker Clinical Pathology (CP) is a relatively new laboratory information system (LIS) operating within the Epic suite of software applications. To date, there have not been any publications describing implementation of Beaker CP. In this report, we describe our experience in implementing Beaker CP version 2012 at a state academic medical center with a go-live of August 2014 and a subsequent upgrade to Beaker version 2014 in May 2015. The implementation of Beaker CP was concurrent with implementations of Epic modules for revenue cycle, patient scheduling, and patient registration. METHODS: Our analysis covers approximately 3 years of time (2 years preimplementation of Beaker CP and roughly 1 year after) using data summarized from pre- and post-implementation meetings, debriefings, and the closure document for the project. RESULTS: We summarize positive aspects of, and key factors leading to, a successful implementation of Beaker CP. The early inclusion of subject matter experts in the design and validation of Beaker workflows was very helpful. Since Beaker CP does not directly interface with laboratory instrumentation, the clinical laboratories spent extensive preimplementation effort establishing middleware interfaces. Immediate challenges postimplementation included bar code scanning and nursing adaptation to Beaker CP specimen collection. The most substantial changes in laboratory workflow occurred with microbiology orders. This posed a considerable challenge with microbiology orders from the operating rooms and required intensive interventions in the weeks following go-live. In postimplementation surveys, pathology staff, informatics staff, and end-users expressed satisfaction with the new LIS. CONCLUSIONS: Beaker CP can serve as an effective LIS for an academic medical center. Careful planning and preparation aid the transition to this LIS. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016-02-05 /pmc/articles/PMC4763507/ /pubmed/26955505 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2153-3539.175798 Text en Copyright: © 2016 Journal of Pathology Informatics http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Technical Note
Krasowski, Matthew D.
Wilford, Joseph D.
Howard, Wanita
Dane, Susan K.
Davis, Scott R.
Karandikar, Nitin J.
Blau, John L.
Ford, Bradley A.
Implementation of Epic Beaker Clinical Pathology at an academic medical center
title Implementation of Epic Beaker Clinical Pathology at an academic medical center
title_full Implementation of Epic Beaker Clinical Pathology at an academic medical center
title_fullStr Implementation of Epic Beaker Clinical Pathology at an academic medical center
title_full_unstemmed Implementation of Epic Beaker Clinical Pathology at an academic medical center
title_short Implementation of Epic Beaker Clinical Pathology at an academic medical center
title_sort implementation of epic beaker clinical pathology at an academic medical center
topic Technical Note
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4763507/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26955505
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2153-3539.175798
work_keys_str_mv AT krasowskimatthewd implementationofepicbeakerclinicalpathologyatanacademicmedicalcenter
AT wilfordjosephd implementationofepicbeakerclinicalpathologyatanacademicmedicalcenter
AT howardwanita implementationofepicbeakerclinicalpathologyatanacademicmedicalcenter
AT danesusank implementationofepicbeakerclinicalpathologyatanacademicmedicalcenter
AT davisscottr implementationofepicbeakerclinicalpathologyatanacademicmedicalcenter
AT karandikarnitinj implementationofepicbeakerclinicalpathologyatanacademicmedicalcenter
AT blaujohnl implementationofepicbeakerclinicalpathologyatanacademicmedicalcenter
AT fordbradleya implementationofepicbeakerclinicalpathologyatanacademicmedicalcenter