Every order is original, expert-done, and screened for AI — full report on request.See how it works

Assignment questions
Health Information ManagementPresentationHealth informatics

CPOE implementation committee role presentation guide

A role-based PowerPoint: pick one committee seat in the CPOE rollout case, identify the issues visible from that seat, trace their probable causes, and recommend fixes before the specialty units go live.

Editorial process

Last reviewed · August 12, 2026

01

How does the chosen role change the analysis?

The assignment's design choice is the role, and it does more work than students usually give it credit for. You are not writing a neutral post-mortem of the rollout; you are one committee member whose position on that committee determines which issues are even visible to you in the first place. A nurse informaticist sees workflow disruption, verbal-order workarounds, and the downstream clerical burden when physicians resist; a physician member sees clinical productivity, order-set design, and the professional autonomy the resisters are actually defending; a CMIO or administrator sees training resource allocation, project timeline risk, and the governance gap that let three physicians simply not participate. Declare your role on the first slide and let it filter everything downstream — the marking clearly distinguishes a presentation genuinely built from a seat at that table from a generic implementation checklist wearing a job title as decoration.

The issues you identify should come from the case's own facts rather than from the literature's general list, and this case is precise about them. The rollout is sequenced — general medical and surgical units live, ICU, pediatrics and obstetrics next month — which makes the plan's premise, working out kinks on the general units first, testable: the specialty units have order requirements the general units never exercised, so untested complexity is a real issue, not a theoretical one. Most prescribers have adapted, some are asking for remote order entry, and three are resisting without comment, which is the case's sharpest fact: silent resistance is harder to remediate than stated objection, and it produces workarounds nobody has documented. The three-year timeline to bring the hospital up to speed, and the post-merger context underneath it, supply the organizational pressure driving all of these problems at once.

Probable causes are graded as reasoning, so each issue needs its own cause traced rather than a single culture explanation applied to everything. Resistance usually decomposes into specific things — training that did not fit clinical schedules, an interface that costs more time per order than paper, loss of perceived autonomy, no visible feedback loop for complaints, or merger-driven change fatigue — and naming which applies to which issue is what earns the marks. Recommendations then follow one to one, and the strong ones are specific, sequenced before the next go-live, and justified with research rather than asserted: super-user staffing on the specialty units, order-set validation with those units' own clinicians, targeted outreach to the resisting physicians, a documented escalation path, and a decision framework for the remote-access requests. Close with the required APA reference slide, and keep the deck short as the case specifies.

Likely learning objectives

Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.

  • 01
    Declare a committee role and filter every issue through that seat's actual visibility.
  • 02
    Draw issues from the case's own facts — the untested specialty-unit sequencing, the silent resisters, the remote-access requests.
  • 03
    Trace a distinct probable cause per issue rather than applying one culture explanation to all.
  • 04
    Recommend specific, research-justified fixes deliverable before the next go-live.
  • 05
    Build a short deck with an APA reference slide as required.
Assignment instructionsQuoted verbatim

Read the full question

Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.

Implementing New Computer Systems Case Study: Implementing New Computer Systems Assignment Details: Perform the following tasks: · To complete this assignment: – Review the case study and select one of the committee roles. – Your selection as a member on the committee – Identification one or more issues, related to your role on the committee – Identification of probable cause(s) of identified issue(s) – Proposed recommendations to resolve the identified issues – Reference slide – list of academic references, using APA style Case Study Read the following case study A good friend of yours is director of nursing at a 220-bed community hospital. Last year the hospital merged with a much larger medical center. One of the upsides, as well as one of the challenges, resulting from this change has been the rapid introduction of new computer systems. The goal is to bring the hospital “up to speed” within 3 years. At present, the Computerized Physician Order Entry (CPOE) is being implemented. The general medical and surgical units went live last month. The ICU, pediatrics, and obstetrics units are scheduled to go live next month. The plan is to work out any kinks or problems on the general units and then go live in the specialty units. Most of the physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants initially complained but are now becoming more comfortable with the computers and are beginning to integrate the CPOE process into their daily routines. Several physicians are now requesting the ability to enter orders from their offices and others are looking into this option. However, three physicians have not commented during this process but are clearly resisting. For example, after performing rounds and returning to their offices they called the unit with verbal orders. After being counseled on this behavior, they began to write the orders on scraps of paper and put these in the patient’s charts or leave them at the nurses’ station. When they were informed that these were not “legal orders,” they began smuggling in order sheets from the non-activated units. In addition, they have been coercing the staff nurses on the units to enter the orders for them. This has taken two forms. Sometimes they sign in and then ask the nurses to enter the orders. Other times they ask the nurses to put the orders in verbally and then they confirm the orders. The nurses feel caught between the hospital’s goals and the need to maintain a good working relationship with these physicians. You suggest to your friend (director of nursing) to create an informal committee to review the issues surrounding the CPOE implementation. The committee would determine methods to address these issues, prior to implementing CPOE within the ICU, pediatrics, and obstetrics units. Your friend appreciates the suggestion and forms a small committee with the following members: · Taylor Terrific, RN – a nurse practitioner · Dr. Dudley Do-Right – a physician who uses the CPOE system routinely and correctly · Dr. Frank Burns – a physician who rarely, if ever, uses the CPOE system The director of nursing asks each committee member to create a short PowerPoint presentation for the committee. The presentation would identify issues that occurred during CPOE implementation, identify potential causes of such issues, and list specific recommendations, based on strong rationale and research, to resolve the identified issues prior to the next CPOE implementation. Each committee member will have a unique perspective, based on their position (i.e., nurse, physician).
02

Turn the brief into deliverables

  1. 01
    A short PowerPoint presentation stating your committee role.
  2. 02
    Identified issues related to that role, with probable causes.
  3. 03
    Recommendations with strong rationale and research, plus an APA reference slide.
03

How should issues, causes, and fixes be sequenced?

01

Your seat on the committee

State the role and what it makes visible — workflow and workarounds, clinical productivity and order sets, or governance and resourcing — establishing the lens for everything after.

02

The issues this case documents

Name the specific problems: untested specialty-unit order complexity behind the sequencing premise, undocumented workarounds from silent resistance, and the unresolved remote-order-entry requests.

03

Probable causes, traced separately

Decompose each issue into its likely driver — training fit, interface time cost, autonomy loss, absent feedback loop, merger change fatigue — matching cause to issue.

04

Recommendations before the next go-live

Propose super-user coverage, specialty-clinician order-set validation, targeted outreach to the resisters, an escalation path, and a remote-access decision framework — each justified by research.

04

Where is the CPOE implementation evidence?

Recommended databases

  • AHRQ PSNet
  • HealthIT.gov

Search sequence

  1. 1.
    Read the CPOE primer for documented implementation failure modes and safety benefits.
  2. 2.
    Review the clinical decision support material for the order-set and alerting issues specialty units raise.
  3. 3.
    Gather evidence on training models and super-user staffing for the recommendations.
  4. 4.
    Draft role, issues, causes, and recommendations as parallel slides, then build the reference slide.
05

Reference shortlist

These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.

Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.

  1. 01

    Computerized Provider Order Entry

    AHRQ Patient Safety Network · 2019

    The documented benefits and failure modes of CPOE — workarounds, alert fatigue, new error types — that the issues and causes sections argue from.

  2. 02

    Clinical Decision Support

    Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology · 2024

    The order-set and decision-support design frame behind the specialty-unit validation recommendation.

  3. 03

    Health IT Playbook

    Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology · 2024

    Implementation and change-management guidance — training, governance, and clinician engagement — for the research-backed recommendations.

06

Review before submission

Common mistakes

  • Naming a role and then writing a role-neutral implementation checklist.
  • Listing generic CPOE problems the literature reports instead of the ones this case documents.
  • Explaining every issue with 'resistance to change' rather than tracing separate causes.
  • Treating the three silent physicians as a minor detail when silent resistance is the case's hardest problem.
  • Recommending fixes that cannot be executed before the specialty units go live next month.
  • Omitting the APA reference slide, which is an explicitly listed deliverable.

Submission checklist

  • Committee role stated up front and sustained throughout.
  • Issues drawn from case facts and visible from that role.
  • One probable cause traced per issue.
  • Recommendations specific, sequenced before next go-live, and research-backed.
  • Reference slide in APA style; deck kept short.

Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.

Written by

Aaron Bishop

MA, Education

assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines

Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.

Reviewed by

Dr. Nathan Cole

PhD, Rhetoric & Composition

Argumentation and thesis development

Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.

Want feedback on your plan before you draft?

Get help interpreting the brief, checking your evidence strategy, and strengthening your outline while keeping the work your own.

Get assignment guidance
Start your order