Measuring the Value and Impact of Hospital Library Services

1. Measuring the Value and Impact of Hospital Library Services Penka Stoyanova, MISt The Credit Valley Hospital and Trillium Health Centre

2. Partners in Crime  • Christina Woodward, MA, MLIS, Trillium Health Centre • Penka Stoyanova, MISt, The Credit Valley Hospital (pstoyanova@cvh.on.ca) • Jeanna Hough, MA, MLIS, Halton Healthcare System (jhough@haltonhealthcare.on.ca)

3. Library Survey - Background • September 2010 – CVH and THC • Timing • Projected merger of CVH and THC • Transition to teaching status • Development of new clinical initiatives aligned with strategic initiatives at both hospitals • Quality Patient Care, Access, Sustainability • Research, Education, Innovation • Results - Poster at the Annual Conference of the Canadian Health Libraries Association 2011 in Calgary, Alberta

4. Background – cont’d • October 2011 – CVH, THC, HHS • Hypothesis – Our hospital libraries: • Support clinical and non-clinical evidence-based decision-making and practice • Support research and manuscript preparation (policies, procedures, publications) • Support staff and students in their learning and current awareness needs

5. Library Survey – Opportunity to… • Determine impact of library resources and services • Keep pace with changing user needs, identify user preferences and future needs • Continue examining our products and services with respect to new and emerging technologies • Document user perspective on the strengths of library products and services • Validate identified resource needs to our administration • Contribute to a needed pool of data in support of the value and impact of library services in hospitals

6. Methodology • Survey instrument – three sections: • Resource • Knowledge • Utility • Questions concentrate on available resources, NOT librarian-mediated services, so that respondents can draw their own conclusions regarding the value/impact of the Library and its resources • When needed – questions were tailored to the individual hospital environment, but were presented so that we could still benchmark off one another • Copies of the survey are available upon request

7. Methodology – continued • Tools • Zoomerang Online Surveys and Polls (THC) • TooFAST (free assessment summary tool www.toofast.ca) at CVH and HHS • For consistency data was exported in MS Excel for analysis • Distribution • Electronically from several access points at the hospitals intranet portals • Available in hard copy, with the data transcribed to Zoomerang and TooFAST by library staff • The survey was open for a period of about one month • Open to all affiliated physicians, clinical and non-clinical staff

8. Survey Participants

9. Impact of Library Services

10. How has your use of library services impacted your work in the past year? • 23-41% - improved patient care decisions • 3-6% - decreased adverse events, or led to changes in diagnostic tests • 58-68% - supported their learning • 35-50% supported best practice guidelines • 36-48% - saved them time • 6-8% - impacted cost reduction • 35-54% - indicated ability to stay current in their area of interest • 25-44% supported their projects

11. Library Resources – A Tool for…

12. Motivation for Information Seeking

13. Benchmarking

14. More Benchmarking

15. Utility of Library Services (Are you satisfied with …)

16. How often do you visit the library?

17. Is the Library intranet site easy to use? Do you have remote access to Library resources?

18. Response Time Expectations

19. Discussion • Some of the things we learned about our users: • What motivates their information seeking behaviour – acquiring new knowledge, patient care, best practices • Which of our resources they used most – access to full text, mediated literature searches, article requests • What they think about our space and decor • How often they visit the libraries • What are their response time expectations • What they think of library staff and the services we provide

20. Discussion – cont’d • Survey respondents indicated the significant role of the library in support of • Their learning, studies, and staying current • Best practice guidelines development and publications and other projects • Patient care decision making • Validated that resources do impact outcomes • Improved patient care decisions • Saved time • Led to cost reduction

21. CVH (2010 and 2011) What we do best? • Excellent services from library staff • competent, knowledge-able, have the right attitude • Library services support • clinical/non-clinical areas • evidence-based decision making • Fast and efficient services What needs improvement? • Space is limited; number of workstations is not enough • Training/promotion of services • remote (offsite) access • ID cards access 24/7 • group training sessions • Need for more online full-text resources

22. Conclusions • Library usage stats convey only a part of the impact of libraries and their resources • Our users • See the Library’s role as significant (value of the library) • Validate that resources do impact outcomes • How will we use the results? • Present to senior administrators/budget purposes • Share with colleagues

23. Thank you! • For supporting the launching of the survey at all three sites • Melissa Paladines, Library Technician, CVH, for her enthusiastic support and assistance in running the survey