Teaching a procedure people do with their hands, on a screen

Complex content, and a budget

AccessRN wanted training on infusion therapy that was cost-effective, modern, and still simple enough to follow.

Those pull against each other, which is the whole brief. Clinical content resists simplification because every simplification is a clinical decision. Budget resists length. And the audience is working clinicians, who will close a course that wastes their time faster than any other group we build for.

AccessRN named the hard part themselves: keeping people motivated to the end. Their existing approach did not, and they knew it.

What it had to teach

The full infusion therapy procedure. Site selection and catheter types. Complications, the interventions for them, and how to prevent them arising. Infection prevention. Peripheral IV insertion.

And then two more that most vendors would have quietly dropped: the legal considerations, and how to document accurately and compliantly.

The two modules nobody asks for are the two that get used

Legal considerations and documentation were in scope from the start, and they belong there.

A nurse who can place a line and cannot record it correctly has a problem that surfaces months later, in an audit or a claim, when nobody remembers the shift. The clinical modules are what people expect to be taught. The documentation module is the one that protects them.

Building it that way changes the tone of the whole class. It stops being a procedure refresher and becomes a description of the job as it is actually done, paperwork included.

How it was built

Seven modules, to AccessRN's own branding, with animation and interaction carrying the parts that are hard to describe in a sentence.

Voiceover throughout, so the sequence can be followed while watching the demonstration rather than reading over it. Progress tracking and a menu, so a clinician interrupted mid-module can find their place again, which on a hospital schedule happens constantly. Help built in. SCORM compliant, so it runs in the system AccessRN already had. Responsive, because the device is whatever is nearest.

Multiple choice at the end of each module, written to reinforce rather than to catch people out.

What happened

Participation and engagement rose after launch. The interactive parts held people through the sequence, and the assessments gave them somewhere to demonstrate what they knew.

AccessRN reported better retention and understanding, positive feedback on how usable the courses were, and that the training objectives were met. They were satisfied with the result.

No completion percentage exists for this programme. We are not going to produce one.

What we would tell someone in the same position

What we would tell someone commissioning clinical training

Put the documentation and the legal content in the same course as the procedure, not in a separate compliance module that people take in a different month. They are one job. And ask your vendor how a learner resumes after an interruption, because in a clinical setting almost nobody completes a module in one sitting, and a course that forgets where they were is a course that gets abandoned at module three.