The Survey

The survey is an updated version of the Rochester study. [See: "The impact of the hospital library on clinical decision making: the Rochester study.” Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1992 Apr;80(2):169-78. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC225641/?tool=pubmed] It is designed to account for changes in healthcare and technology, including the more independent nature of clinician searching. Members of the Planning Committee developed the online survey component using the same “critical incident” technique employed in the Rochester study. Respondents are asked to think of one recent occasion when they needed information related to patient care. They then answer a series of questions based on that specific occasion. The survey captures the type of information needed, resources used, how the resources were accessed, where the search was conducted, whether the needed information was found and, if so, which resources contained the needed information. The survey also captures the impact the information had on patient care, such as choice of diagnostic test, choice of medications, or advice given to the patient. The survey also asks whether any adverse effects—hospital admission/readmission, surgery, language or cultural misunderstandings, or hospital acquired infections—were avoided as a result of the acquired information.

The consultant research team, from the University of North Carolina (UNC), includes Joanne Marshall, one of the original authors of the Rochester study. This team worked with programmers from a private survey company to transform the survey designed by the Planning Committee into an online instrument. They also assisted in the development of the Facilitator Handbook, including sections on IRB approval with a blanket statement of approval from the UNC IRB. This team is charged with analyzing the data and writing reports for both the overall study results and institution-specific results. The goal is to make the overall results available on the Web and individual reports available to each institution.

Pilot Testing

In order to validate the study design and the methodology, the online survey was pilot- tested by seven institutions in the late summer of 2010. Based on those results, adjustments were made to both the survey and the registration process. A poster describing the design and the full results of the pilot testing will be presented at the MLA Annual Meeting in Minneapolis.

Full Launch

The full launch of the online survey is planned for March 2011. Participating institutions receive a Facilitator Handbook, a Quick Guide of important procedures and dates, and a survey URL specific to their institution. The Facilitator Handbook provides a comprehensive level of detail such as information on how to obtain IRB approval, sample wording of the invitation email, sample wording of the institutional champion email, and sample flyers for advertising the survey. Survey sites are required to recruit an institutional champion; obtain local IRB approval or exemption; gain access to internal email lists in order to send an invitation email containing the link to the survey; publicize the survey at their institution; and send out email reminders. The ‘”institutional champion” should be a high-level administrator who will support the study and give it legitimacy and credibility in the eyes of the populations being surveyed. The main role of the champion is to send out an email alerting the target population that an important message about the survey will be coming to their email. In the carefully outlined methodology, the institutional champion’s responsibility is to send this email out just a few days before the librarian sends the invitation email with the link to the survey. The champion must provide his/her name and a quote to be used in emails and must encourage department or division heads to ask physicians and nurses to complete the survey. Suggested institutional champions would be the hospital or medical CEO, COO, CNO or CFO; a Vice President, Dean or Chancellor. It is expected that using an institutional champion will encourage participation and increase the response rate.

Participating Sites

The enrolled sites include institutions from the Middle Atlantic, Southeastern Atlantic, Greater Midwest, Midcontinental, South Central, Pacific Northwest, Pacific Southwest, New England and Canada regions. More than half of the institutions enrolled report the number of health professionals they serve as more than 2000. Hospitals served by participating libraries range in size from less than 100 beds to more than 499 beds. Sites include both institutions which are members of the Council of Teaching Hospitals and those which are not. The majority of the institutions are located in an urban setting. The full study is expected to include up to 65 hospitals.

The Value of Libraries and Information Services in Patient Care study has been funded in part with Federal funds from the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, under Contract No. NO1-LM-6-3501 with the New York University School of Medicine. Additional support is provided by the Hospital Library Section of the Medical Library Association (MLA), the NY/NJ Chapter of MLA, the Philadelphia Chapter of MLA, the Upstate New York and Ontario Chapter of MLA, the New York State Reference and Research Library Resources Councils, and the Donald Lindberg Research Fellowship from MLA. The study planning team is comprised of Julia Sollenberger, University of Rochester Medical Center; Joanne Gard Marshall, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Sharon Easterby-Gannett, Christiana Care Health System; Mary Lou Klem, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center; Lynn Kasner Morgan, Mount Sinai Medical Center; Kathleen (Kate) Burr Oliver, NN/LM MAR; Karen Brewer, New York University; Susan Cavanaugh, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey; Kathel Dunn, Consultant, Private; Sue Hunter, NN/LM MAR; and Neil Romanosky, NN/LM MAR. The research team at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is comprised of Joanne Gard Marshall, Jennifer Craft Morgan, Cheryl A. Thompson and Amber Wells.

Susan K. Cavanaugh, MS, MPH
Planning Committee
Value of Library and Information Services in Patient Care Study
and Reference Librarian
UMDNJ Camden Campus Library
Cooper University Hospital
Camden, NJ
Cavanaugh-Susan@cooperhealth.edu

The last “Dig Deeper” section focused on collaborative web tools–mainly Google Docs and Forms. I had used both before, but got a lot out of the experience. The organizers had a clever approach: they broke up the large group of participants into small groups. The first assigment involved the small group collaborating on documents. The second assignment harnassed the power of the large group. Each person created a survey and sent it to the full group. People came up with all sorts of creative questions, summarized here and here. As we filled out each other’s surveys and wrestled with the data we learned about question construction and the mechanics of using Google Forms.

I asked about podcast use. (Take the survey.) As someone who mainly listens to them on an iPod while doing dishes at home I was interested to see that more people are listening to them on their computers at work.

Where do you usually listen to podcasts?

How do you usually listen to podcasts?

Some of the responses to the question, “What podcasts do you listen to regularly that you’d recommend (work and/or non-work)?”

• CME related courses 
• Countdown with Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow Show, The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, Wait Wait Don’t Tell Me, Meet The Press, Washington Week In Review 
• Things you missed in High School. 
• This American Life 
• The Peoples’ Pharmacy 
• Stuff you should know 
• Essential Evidence + 
• this american life 
• Teaching Company 
• running 
• Don’t listen regularly, just every once in a great while and then it can be either recreational (interviews) or work-related 
• Nothing comes to mind. 
• They Might Be Giants Podcasts 
• This American Life, Story Core 
• NPR CDC 
• National Public Broadcast 
• this american life 
• I listen to a pod cast created by my institution
• yoga 
• Science Friday, This American Life 
• The ones for the classes! 
• French language 
• none – I’ve been disappointed 
• italian phrases 
• This American Life (NPR) 
• Tech Therapy (Chronicle of Higher Education), NPR 
• I don’t listen to anything regularly; just if something is recommended on a blog or discussion list.
• On The Media

Please excuse the cross posting.

I am doing research in use of on-line learning resources (including virtual worlds like Second Life) for nurse education. Would you please share with your institutions’ departments of nursing the information the link to survey where we are gathering data?

The survey asks questions regarding attitudes toward online learning and the use of gaming or virtual worlds. The url is:

http://www.eastern.edu/library/Survey.html

We have had a wonderful response thus far and hope to gather more data over the coming weeks. The survey will run throughout October.

Thank you all in advance.
Mark