Interlibrary loan and document delivery in North American health sciences libraries during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic
Keywords:Access services, COVID-19, document delivery, health sciences libraries, hospital libraries, interlibrary loan, print collections.
Objective: The study purpose was to understand how early months of the COVID-19 pandemic altered interlibrary loan (ILL) and document delivery (DD) in North American health science libraries (HSLs), specifically the decision-making and workflow adjustments associated with accessing their own collections and obtaining content not available via ILL.
Methods: Researchers distributed an online 26-question survey through 24 health science library email lists from January 6-February 7, 2021. Respondents reported their library’s ILL and DD activities from March-August 2020, including ILL/DD usage and policies, collection access, decision-making, and workflow adjustments. In addition to calculating frequencies, cross-tabulation and statistical tests were performed to test a priori potential associations. Two researchers independently and thematically analyzed responses to the 2 open-ended questions and reached consensus on themes.
Results: Hospital libraries represented 52% (n=226/431) of respondents, along with 42% academic (n=179) and 6% (n=26) multi-type or other special. Only 1% (n=5) closed completely with no remote services, but many, 45% (n=194), ceased ILL of print materials. More than half (n=246/423; 58%) agreed that ILL requests likely to be filled from print remained unfilled more than is typical. Open-ended questions yielded 5 themes on ILL/DD staffing, setup, and systems; 6 on impacts for libraries and library users.
Conclusion: Lack of communication regarding collection availability and staffing resulted in delayed or unfilled requests. Hospital and academic libraries made similar decisions about continuing services but reported different experiences in areas such as purchasing digital content. Hybrid ILL/DD workflows may continue for managing these services.
Koos J, Scheinfeld L, Larson C. Pandemic-proofing your library: disaster response and lessons learned from COVID-19. Med Ref Serv Q. 2020 Feb;40(1):67–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02763869.2021.1873624.
Howes L, Ferrell L, Pettys G, Roloff A. Adapting to remote library services during COVID-19. Med Ref Serv Q. 2021 Feb;40(1):35–47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02763869.2021.1873616.
Harnegie MP. COVID snapshot: How medical libraries and staff adapt to deliver services during a pandemic. J Hosp Librariansh. 2021; 21(2):173–183. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15323269.2021.1904184.
Massey ME. Lessons learned in leaving the library and coming back again. Pennsylvania Libraries: Research & Practice. 2020 Fall;8(2):100–102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/palrap.2020.239.
Clifton VL, Flathers KM, Brigham TJ. COVID-19: Background and health sciences library response during the first months of the pandemic. Med Ref Serv Q. 2021 Feb;40(1):1–10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02763869.2021.1873611.
Norton MJ, Wilson DT, Yowell SS. Partnering to promote service continuity in the event of an emergency: a successful collaboration between two interlibrary loan departments. J Med Libr Assoc. 2009 Apr;97(2):131–134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.97.2.010.
Tranfield MW, Worsham D, Mody N. When you only have a week: rapid-response, grassroots public services for access, wellness, and student success. C&RL News. 2020 Jul/Aug;81(7):326–329, 336. DOI: https://crln.acrl.org/index.php/crlnews/article/view/24533.
Creazzo J, Bakker C, Jo P, Koos J, Alpi KM. Report from the Field: Researching interlibrary loan/document delivery usage by health sciences libraries during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve. 2020;29(3-5):171-179. DOI: 10.1080/1072303X.2021.1936739.
Tamase M. DOCLINE update: new “print resources available” filter now available! [Internet]. 2020 April 3 [cited 2021 September 29]. https://news.nnlm.gov/psr-newsbits/docline-print-resources-available-filter/.
Theisen L. DOCLINE: connecting medical libraries for 35 years [Internet]. 2020 December 16 [cited 2021 October 12]. https://nlmdirector.nlm.nih.gov/2020/12/16/docline-connecting-medical-libraries-for-35-years/.
National Library of Medicine. Programs and Services Fiscal Year 2012. [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2021 October 11]. https://www.nlm.nih.gov/ocpl/anreports/fy2012.pdf.
OCLC resource sharing facts and statistics [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2021 October 11]. https://www.oclc.org/en/worldshare-ill/statistics.html.
Lessick S, Perryman C, Billman BL, Alpi KM, De Groote SL, Babin TD Jr. Research engagement of health sciences librarians: a survey of research-related activities and attitudes. J Med Libr Assoc. 2016 Apr;104(2):166-73. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.104.2.015.
Merriam S. Qualitative research in practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2002.
Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1990.
Burrows, S. A review of electronic journal acquisition, management, and use in health sciences libraries. J Med Libr Assoc. 2006 Jan;94(1):67-74. PMID: 16404472; PMCID: PMC1324774.
Copyright (c) 2022 Jennifer K. Lloyd, Kristine M. Alpi, Margaret A. Hoogland, Priscilla Stephenson, Elizabeth Meyer
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.