Enterprise implementation / 2008–2009 implementation period

Epic: safer patient-registration workflows

Connecting staff observation, verification controls and role-based coaching across patient-access environments.

Product implementationHealthcareLearning strategy
PROJECT AT A GLANCE15

Employees directly trained and managed

6 registration areas · 15 direct reports
01 / THE BUSINESS CHALLENGE

What needed to change.

Across emergency, maternity, same-day surgery and other registration areas, staff sometimes relied on existing demographic or insurance information rather than re-verifying it. The gap introduced audit exceptions and downstream billing risk.

02 / MY CONTRIBUTION

Where I came in.

I managed and trained 15 overnight registration staff in a broader six-area patient-access scope; documented workflow gaps; escalated proposed changes to the Epic team; used Epic Prelude, RTE and Grand Central; and created an audit report for incomplete registration work.

03 / DESIGN & DELIVERY

The work behind the work.

01 ↗

Map

Document registration, eligibility-verification and patient-movement workflows.

02 ↗

Identify

Use audit findings to surface missing ID or insurance-verification steps.

03 ↗

Escalate

Advocate for required verification prompts and controls through the Epic implementation team.

04 ↗

Reinforce

Coach frontline staff, support go-live and monitor incomplete-task audit reports.

04 / VISUAL WORKFLOW

From challenge to adoption.

ILLUSTRATIVE WORKFLOW · NOT A CLIENT SYSTEM SCREENSHOTCONCEPT / The Christ Hospital
01MapDocument registration, eligibility-verification and patient-movement wor…
→
02IdentifyUse audit findings to surface missing ID or insurance-verification steps…
→
03EscalateAdvocate for required verification prompts and controls through the Epic…
→
04ReinforceCoach frontline staff, support go-live and monitor incomplete-task audit…
05 / OUTCOME & EVIDENCE

What can be said.

✦

Registration controls and follow-up were strengthened through workflow documentation, escalations, audit reports and coaching. No validated before/after error rate is available.

Role and attribution boundaries

The six-area initiative involved a wider audience than my 15 direct reports. I do not claim Epic certification, hands-on system configuration or an exact six-department roster.

HOW THE WORK CAME TOGETHER

From business need to usable experience.

An evidence-based overview. Where formal measurements or historical details are unavailable, that limitation is stated instead of filling in the gaps.

01

Business problem & context

Registration teams sometimes relied on stale identification and insurance information, increasing audit exceptions and downstream revenue-cycle risk.

02

Discovery & needs analysis

Documented workflows across six patient-registration areas and used audit observations to identify gaps in ID and coverage re-verification.

03

Audience & performance gaps

An overnight registration team of 15 direct reports, within a wider six-area patient-access rollout, needed reliable verification steps.

04

Learning or technology solution

Role-based Epic training, audit follow-up, reinforced ID and insurance checks, documentation and recommended validation controls.

05

Design & development approach

Escalated verification-related change requests to the Epic implementation team; coached staff using audit findings and practical workflow support.

06

Tools & implementation

Epic Prelude, RTE and Grand Central in patient-access workflows; no underlying Epic configuration ownership or certification is claimed.

07

Outcomes & lessons learned

Registration controls and follow-up improved qualitatively. No validated before/after error rate or attribution metric is available.