Transcript Under Pressure

Under Pressure: Making the Case for Hospital Libraries
Rebecca Bayrer, MLIS; Suzanne Beattie, MLIS; Elizabeth Lucas, MLIS, AHIP; Dawn Melberg, MLIS; Eve Melton, MLIS, AHIP
Survey Method
Kaiser Permanente Northern California Libraries
Introduction
Preliminary Results, 2010
Purpose: This poster showcases the development and
implementation of methods to qualitatively and quantitatively assess
medical librarians’ contributions to their hospital system.
Participants: The authors are a committee of librarians from Kaiser
Permanente hospitals in Northern California.
Quality Patient Care
Total Responses = 314
Contributed to
higher-quality
care
214
Brief description: We were asked to develop a way of measuring
the libraries’ return on investment. We created a new missionoriented system for labeling and categorizing library tasks, then
created an after-visit online survey for outcome measurement.
Early results indicate that our work has a significant effect on clinical
care and quality at our institutions, and that library patrons recognize
this value.
Information
was of clinical
value
68%
68%
68%
74%
74
%
56%
56%
Better informed
clinical
decision
175
Adverse Events Avoided
Total Responses = 145
First Steps
Committee process: We held virtual and in-person meetings from
summer 2009 to the present. Early in the process we conducted a
literature review to look for established best practices.
Hospital
admission
21
14%
14%
23%
Value categories: Inspired by the article cited at right, we looked for a
way to tie the libraries’ work more closely to Kaiser Permanente’s
mission and goals. We began assigning librarian-mediated search
requests and other questions to a category framework derived from
components of the hospitals’ mission:
• Clinical care
• Quality / risk / safety
• Member services
• Education / knowledge
• Research / innovation
• Utilization / business / management
• Other
Surveys: We also looked for a way to quantitatively evaluate our
libraries’ contributions to the hospitals. We developed a short online
survey to measure user satisfaction and information impact. Six
libraries implemented the survey in 2010 as a pilot program.
74% 231
Additional tests
/ procedures
79
54%
54%
71%
21%
14%
21%
7%
9% 14%
7%
9%
3%
Surgery
13
Patient
mortality
31
Hospitalacquired
infection
10
During the
pilot
program,
our survey
showed
145
adverse
events
were
avoided
thanks to
library
searches.
Next Steps
Implementation: All Kaiser Permanente librarians in Northern
California will use the standardized survey beginning in spring 2011.
Change in Practice
Total Responses = 214
14%
Diagnosis
59
23%
21%
14%
54%
Overall patient
care and
treatment
71%
14%
9%3% 7%
Choice of tests
36
Choice of
medications
182
Length of stay
(if hospitalized)
37
7
Cognitive Value
Total Responses = 339
Refreshed
memory of
detail/facts
129
Provided new
knowledge
281
38%
38%
83%
83%
56%
56%
Substantiated
prior
knowledge
Future development:
• The committee will create a standardized method for assessing and
reporting on survey results.
• Results will be shared with local and regional leadership.
• Results will be used to evaluate and refine library services on an
ongoing basis.
Benefits of our approach:
• The Kaiser Permanente libraries’ mission and goals are now closely
aligned with those of our organization.
• The value categories allow us to speak our administrators’ language
and better convey our value to key organizational leaders.
• The survey results provide quantitative data on library user
satisfaction, solidly supporting our contribution to quality patient care
and hospital performance improvement.
• Data is standardized across the region to provide a consistent method
of evaluating our services as a whole.
• The value categories and survey process are easily adaptable for use
in other medical library settings.
Key Literature Support
190
Survey Method
Abels EG, Cogdill KW, Zach L. Identifying and communicating the
contributions of library and information services in hospitals and
academic health sciences centers. J Med Libr Assoc 2004
Jan;92(1):46-55.
Who: Patrons requesting literature searches or asking other complex
questions.
What: The survey asks the following:
When: Patrons are surveyed midmonth, following the month when the
request was received.
• Why was the search request made?
Rebecca Bayrer, 650-742-2540 / [email protected]
• What cognitive value or knowledge did the request provide?
Suzanne Beattie, 916-474-7136 / [email protected]
How: Patrons receive an email with a link to SurveyMonkey. The email
stresses that the survey is short and anonymous and helps track library
outcomes.
• Did the request lead to a change in practice?
• What is the patron’s role in the organization?
• Did the request help in avoiding an adverse event?
Contact Information
Elizabeth Lucas, 408-851-2785 / [email protected]
• Did the request help in providing quality patient care?
Dawn Melberg, 707-393-4526 / [email protected]
• Was the provided information generally satisfactory?
Eve Melton, 209-735-4270 / [email protected]