Classics
Gertrude Lamb’s Pioneering
Concept of the Clinical Medical Librarian
A
Review of:
Lamb, G., Jefferson, A., & White, C. (1975). And now,
‘clinical librarians’ on rounds. Hartford Hospital Bulletin 30(2), 77-86.
Reviewed
by:
Karla Van Kessel
Manager
Health Sciences Library, London Health Sciences Centre
London, Ontario, Canada
Email: karla.vankessel@lhsc.on.ca
Received: 9
Sept. 2011 Accepted: 1 Feb 2012
2012 Van Kessel.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons-Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike License
2.5 Canada (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ca/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the
same or similar license to this one.
Abstract
Objective –
To determine if “the medical librarian with special skills and training in
tested methods for approaching medical literature serve a valuable interface
between the professional who is taking care of patients and the knowledge
explosion in medicine wherein lies the key to better patient care” (p. 78).
Design –
Qualitative study involving the participant librarians keeping a reflective
journal of all interactions with the subjects involved in the first 6 months of
the study (September 1974 – March 1975).
Setting –
Hartford Hospital, Connecticut.
Subjects –
Teaching physicians, house staff, and medical students at Hartford Hospital.
Methods –
This pilot project, funded by a two-year grant from the U.S. Public Health
service and the National Library of Medicine, placed three medical librarians
(two full-time and one part-time) on rounds with pediatrics, medicine, and
surgery teams.
The
librarians kept diaries to record “critical incidents” (p. 86), including the
“acceptance of the program, its impact on patient care, its potential for
changing the information seeking behavior of health professionals, and its
usefulness for developing a core collection of clinical readings” (p. 86).
Main Results –
Despite a few physicians’ initial apprehension, each of the three clinical
librarians recorded indications of acceptance by clinical staff, including a
dramatic increase in literature search requests; increased phone calls,
drop-ins, pages, and requests for research assistance; and gestures of
acceptance from house staff and students.
More
broadly, the literature searches in Lamb’s report identifies direct patient
care (including to “resolve a debate” (p. 84)), medical teaching/education, and
searching techniques for clinicians. It
is implied that these interactions resulted in a higher profile of the
resources and services offered through the library; as one patron queried,
“Would you show me how to find articles and where everything is in the library
sometime?” (p. 83).
Conclusions –
The authors state that while their conclusions are only preliminary and no firm
conclusions can be drawn, there are four observations of note:
Commentary
Dr.
Gertrude Lamb is credited with originating the concept of the “clinical
librarian” (Cimpl, 1985, p. 21). By identifying a gap between
what medicine as a discipline knew about good patient care and the knowledge
that was actually applied to the care of patients (Arcari,
1977, p. 18), Lamb saw an opportunity for librarians to be the connection
during a time of “information explosion”(Lamb, Jefferson & White, 1975, p.
79).
Prior
to this preliminary report, JAMA: Journal
of the American Medical Association announced the funding and goals for the
project, entitling the short column “And now, ‘clinical librarians’ on
rounds”. Lamb uses the same title for
this article crediting JAMA in her
opening paragraph (Lamb, Jefferson & White, 1975, p. 77).
Lamb’s
anecdotal, story-like style was a means of providing an update for the project
in its early months. Despite being
written in 1976, many of the issues reported through the clinical librarians’
diaries resonate with hospital librarians today, such as the physician
transition from being highly skeptical of a librarian’s value to realizing the
value and benefit of having a librarian on the clinical team.
The
following excerpts capture the team dynamic often evident between physician and
clinical librarian in today’s health care environment.
Dr. ___ made
it clear that … this project would not be high on his list. He felt particularly strongly that the House
Staff should get most of their information from textbooks. If they were
desperate, then they might ask the Clinical Librarian to help solve their
problem. (Lamb, Jefferson & White, 1975, p. 79)
I got a
frantic call from Dr. ___ just before 9 a.m. He had a very sick patient and
wanted to know what I could find on current treatment for lymphangitic
cancer of the lung. I did a MEDLINE search, reviewed the citations, and
selected four good articles. I
photocopied these articles and delivered them to Dr. ___ on my way to 10:00
a.m. rounds. (Lamb, Jefferson & White, 1975, p. 79)
Another
clinical librarian reports her experience with acceptance on the clinical
teams:
A librarian
working in the wards is a novelty. People accepted me at first because I was
such a novelty. The first few days they made a point of explaining things to me
– what rounds are, what terms means, etc. After the first week they stopped
explaining and assumed I knew. I suppose that is a measure of acceptance.
(Lamb, Jefferson & White, 1975, p. 80)
It
is of interest to note that the uptake of clinical librarian services greatly
impacted the workload of the librarians: “At the end of the first month, the
Clinical Librarian was working a six-day sixty-hour week. To save her health and
sanity, she was assigned to a four-day, forty-hour week” (p. 81).
This
article is later followed-up with another report, “Bridging the Information
Gap” (1976), in which Lamb reviews the hurdles and successes of the project,
including a budgetary decision to forego the addition of another surgical
resident in favor of keeping the clinical librarian.
Lamb
did not capture or present any empirical data on this project. In one of Lamb’s later articles, Lamb (1982), compares the use of
surveys to “beauty contests,” measuring popularity rather than actual impact
(p. 4).
Lamb
was directly involved in several early adopters of the Clinical Medical
Librarian (CML) design (Algermissen, 1974, p. 358)
and paved the way for other clinical librarian projects for decades to come (Scura, 1981, pp. 50-52). Other, more quantitative studies
were later performed as a derivative of the work done by Lamb and others (Scura, 1981, pp. 50-52) showing the efficiency and
effectiveness of clinical librarian programs (Davidoff, 2000, p. 996).
Despite
many reviews, reports, and articles highlighting the benefits of clinical librarians
as part of hospital patient care teams (Scura, 1981,
p. 50; Barbour, 1986, p. 1921), Lamb’s CML concept is often criticized for
being too labor-intensive, expensive (Demas, 1991, p.
17) and lacking sufficient evidence of impact on patient care (Veenstra, 1992, p. 21).
More
recent research on CMLs employ far more rigorous
methods to examine CML value and effectiveness. One such systematic review on
the effectiveness of clinical librarianship concludes that “there is some
relatively strong evidence that [CML] programs have been well accepted and
liked by most” (Cimpl Wagner, 2004, p. 31), while
another systematic review challenges this notion by stating, “although it is
widely accepted that C[M]Ls
are effective, this review has identified little evidence to support
this”(Winning, 2003, p. 19).
Three
systematic reviews (Brettle, 2010; Winning, 2003; Cimpl Wagner, 2004) examining the effectiveness of CML
programs all conclude that further, high quality research is required in order
to more fully understand the impact of such services.
Criticism
of the CML concept does not change the fact that Lamb’s innovative project not
only inspired further research on the topic, but also fundamentally changed the
way many hospital librarians viewed their services and value in the health care
setting.
References
Algermissen,
V. (1974). Biomedical librarians in a patient care setting
at the university of Missouri-Kansas city school of medicine. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 62(4), 354-358.
And now, ‘clinical
librarians’ on rounds. (1974). JAMA: the journal of the American Medical Association 230(4), 521.
Arcari,
R., & Lamb, G. (1977). The librarian in clinical
care. The
Hospital medical staff 6(12),
18-23.
Barbour, G.
L., & Young, M.N. (1986). Morning report.
Role of the clinical librarian. JAMA: the journal of the American Medical Association 255(14), 1921-2.
Brettle,
A., Maden-Jenkins, M., Anderson, L., McNally, R., Pratchett, T., Tancock, J., Webb,
A. (2010). Evaluating clinical librarian
services: A systematic review. Health
Information and Libraries Journal 28
3–22.
Cimpl,
K. (1985). Clinical Medical Librarianship: A Review of the Literature. Bulletin of the Medical
Library Association 73(1), 21-8.
Cimpl
Wagner, K., & Byrd, G.D. (2004). Evaluating
the effectiveness of clinical medical librarian programs: a systematic review
of the literature. JAMA: the journal of
the Medical Library Association 92(1),
14-33.
Davidoff,
F., & Florance, V. (2000).
The informationist: A new health profession? Annals of Internal Medicine 132(12), 996-998.
Demas,
J. M., & Ludwig, L.T. (1991). Clinical medical
librarian: The last unicorn? Bulletin of
the Medical Library Association 79(1),
17-27.
Lamb,
G., Jefferson, A., & White, C.
(1975). And now, ‘clinical librarians’ on
rounds. Hartford Hospital Bulletin 30(2), 77-86.
Lamb,
G. (1976). Bridging the information gap. Hospital libraries 1(10), 2-4.
Lamb, G. (1982). A decade of clinical librarianship. Clinical Librarian Quarterly 1(1),
2-4.
Scura,
G., & Davidoff, F. (1981). Case-related
use of the medical literature. Clinical librarian services for improving
patient care. JAMA : the journal of the American Medical
Association 245(1), 50-2.
Veenstra,
R. J. (1992). Clinical medical librarian impact on patient care: A one-year
analysis. Bulletin of the Medical Library
Association 80(1), 19-22.
Winning, M.A.,
& Beverley, C.A. (2003). Clinical librarianship: a
systematic review of the literature. Health Information & Libraries Journal
20(s1), 10-21.