The perceived impact of individual evidence summaries on staff activities was evaluated using a brief online questionnaire. Results Overall, 82 requests for evidence summaries were received: 50% related to evidence for individual patient care, 23% to generic clinical issues and 27% were on management/corporate topics.
In the questionnaires 105 participants indicated that the most common impact on their practice was advice given to colleagues (51 respondents), closely followed by the evidence summaries stimulating new ideas for patient care or treatment (50 respondents).
Clinical implications The integration of a CL into clinical and corporate teams is feasible and perceived as having an impact on staff activities. A CL may be able to collate ‘personalised evidence’ which may enhance individualised healthcare. In some cases the usual concept of a hierarchy of evidence may not easily apply, with case reports providing guidance which may be more applicable than population-based studies.
- ‘Personalised evidence’ for personalised healthcare: integration of a clinical librarian into mental health services – a feasibility study Rachel Steele, Paul A. Tiffin BJPsych Bulletin 38(1) 2014 DOI: 10.1192/pb.bp.112.042382
- Published outputs from Rachel's work: Boredom among psychiatric in-patients: does it matter? Rachel Steele , Paul Henderson , Frances Lennon , Donna Swinden BJPsych Advances 19(4) 2013 DOI: 10.1192/apt.bp.112.010363
- Relieving in-patient boredom in general hospitals: the evidence for intervention and practical ideas Rachel Steele , Keith Linsley BJPsych Advances 21(1) 2015 DOI: 10.1192/apt.bp.113.011908
- Development of foundation year 1 psychiatry posts: implications for practice Rachel Steele , Sharon Beattie BJPsych Advances 19(6) 2013 DOI: 10.1192/apt.bp.112.010678