under pressure: making the case for hospital libraries rebecca bayrer, mlis suzanne beattie, mlis...
TRANSCRIPT
Under Pressure: Making the Case
for Hospital Libraries
Rebecca Bayrer, MLISSuzanne Beattie, MLIS
Elizabeth Lucas, MLIS, AHIPDawn Melberg, MLIS
Eve Melton, MLIS, AHIP
Kaiser Permanente, Northern California
Project Timeline
Summer 2009 Fall 2009 2010 Spring 2011
Peer Group Meeting•Query•Brainstorming•Committee Formation
Committee Meetings•Development of value categories•Survey questions
Pilot Surveys Survey becomesstandard practice throughout KP NCAL libraries
• Performed literature review to identify best practices
• Key article: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.
Literature Support
Value Category Concept
• Emerges from objective to align KP Libraries’ mission and goals more closely to Kaiser Permanente’s mission and goals
• Kaiser Permanente's Mission“Kaiser Permanente exists to provide high-quality, affordable health care services and to improve the health of our members and the communities we serve.”
Value Categories
• Member Services
• Utilization / Business / Management
• Education / Knowledge
• Clinical Care
• Research / Innovation
• Quality / Risk / Safety
• Other
The Survey Process
• Who: Patrons requesting literature searches or other complex questions
• What: Short, standardized survey
• When: Monthly
• How: Email with a link to SurveyMonkey
Preliminary Results:Quality Patient Care
Total Responses = 314
Information was of clinical
value
Contributed to higher-quality
care
Better informed clinical
decision
68% 74%
56%
214
175
231
Preliminary Results:Adverse Events Avoided
Total Responses = 145
Additional tests / procedures
Hospital admission
Hospital-acquired infectionSurgery
Patient mortality
79
13
21
31
10
54%
14%
21%
7%9%
Preliminary Results:Change in Practice
Total Responses = 214
Overall patient care and treatment
Diagnosis
Choice of medications
Length of stay (if hospitalized)
Choice of tests71%
3%
14%
14%
23%
182
7
37
36
59
Preliminary Results:Cognitive Value
Total Responses = 339
Provided new knowledge
Refreshed memory of detail/facts
Substantiated prior
knowledge
83%
38%
56%281
129
190
Lessons Learned
• Design of questions• Need to have standardized survey• Timing of survey
Implementation Challenges
• Internal and external buy-in• Getting librarians to send the survey• Getting surveyed individuals to
respond • Standardizing the process and timelines• Creating a process for the analysis and
presentation of regional-level report-outs
Future Implementation Steps
• All KP NCAL libraries will implement the standardized version of the survey
• Results will be compiled at the local and regional level
• Results will be shared with local and regional medical center leadership
• Results will be used for ongoing evaluation of library services for internal performance improvement and external demonstration of value
Benefits
• Aligning our mission and strategy with the organization’s
• Speaking our administrators’ language
• Generating standardized data across the region
• Obtaining direct user satisfaction data that supports our contribution to quality, performance improvement, and patient safety and satisfaction
Questions or Comments?
• Rebecca Bayrer, [email protected]
• Suzanne Beattie, [email protected]
• Elizabeth Lucas, [email protected]
• Dawn Melberg, [email protected]
• Eve Melton, [email protected]