OBJECTIVES: Clinical decision-making in the intensive care setting frequently requires the physician to obtain additional resource information. Physicians typically consult with colleagues, use personal medical books or files, or use library materials. Clinical librarians may also be used. This study evaluates the effectiveness of an ongoing clinical librarian program in the intensive care setting. DESIGN/ SETTING: During a 3-month period, house officers in the medical and coronary ICUs in a major teaching hospital asked the clinical librarian 66 patient-care questions. Attached to the information selected by the clinical librarian was a questionnaire asking how the information was applied. MAIN RESULTS: There was an overall response rate of 65.1%. House officers indicated that the information: a) aided in diagnosis (37.2%), b) contributed to a better understanding of the therapy (51.2%), and c) resulted in improved patient management (30.2%). In some instances, the information was multibeneficial. The clinical librarian spent an average of 47 mins/question, and accumulated an average computer charge of $3.59. Personnel and on-line charges over the 3-month study period averaged $45/question. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical librarian programs may deliver patient-specific information in a timely, cost-effective manner. This information has an impact in the intensive care setting.
OBJECTIVES: Clinical decision-making in the intensive care setting frequently requires the physician to obtain additional resource information. Physicians typically consult with colleagues, use personal medical books or files, or use library materials. Clinical librarians may also be used. This study evaluates the effectiveness of an ongoing clinical librarian program in the intensive care setting. DESIGN/ SETTING: During a 3-month period, house officers in the medical and coronary ICUs in a major teaching hospital asked the clinical librarian 66 patient-care questions. Attached to the information selected by the clinical librarian was a questionnaire asking how the information was applied. MAIN RESULTS: There was an overall response rate of 65.1%. House officers indicated that the information: a) aided in diagnosis (37.2%), b) contributed to a better understanding of the therapy (51.2%), and c) resulted in improved patient management (30.2%). In some instances, the information was multibeneficial. The clinical librarian spent an average of 47 mins/question, and accumulated an average computer charge of $3.59. Personnel and on-line charges over the 3-month study period averaged $45/question. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical librarian programs may deliver patient-specific information in a timely, cost-effective manner. This information has an impact in the intensive care setting.
Authors: Nunzia B Giuse; Taneya Y Koonce; Rebecca N Jerome; Molynda Cahall; Nila A Sathe; Annette Williams Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2005-01-31 Impact factor: 4.497