Student and library services in cooperation

Abstract At Ångström Laboratory, one of the largest campuses at Uppsala University, the Library and the Student Services Office merged in November 2012. This merger is a pilot project to improve service for students and faculty. Ångström Laboratory has around 900 staff and almost 10,000 students, of whom most also spend time at other campuses. In this paper we describe the background and the implementation of the pilot project. One of the main reasons for moving together was the wish to gather together all kinds of student services, including the distribution of written examinations in one place. The central location and open environment of the Library made it a good choice. The heart of the Library and Student Services is an open office consisting of two service desks located in the library area. There are silent study areas; computers for searching and printing, an area for relaxing with newspapers and journals, meeting rooms and offices for the staff. The result is a lively place with a cosy atmosphere. As the Library and the Student Services still belong to different parts of the University we are now starting to find out how best to collaborate. To understand more we log all the questions we get and the services we deliver. We also have meetings together and use the same lunch room to get to know each other and our different functions. We will define which matters can be solved in common, and how we can back each other up when necessary.

Improving continence services for older people from the service-providers’ perspective : a qualitative interview study

Objective: To examine in depth the views and experiences of continence service leads in England on key service and continence management characteristics in order to identify and to improve our understanding of barriers to a good-quality service and potential facilitators to develop and to improve services for older people with urinary incontinence (UI). Design: Qualitative semistructured interviews using a purposive sample recruited across 16 continence services. Setting: 3 acute and 13 primary care National Health Service Trusts in England. Participants: 16 continence service leads in England actively treating and managing older people with UI. Results: In terms of barriers to a good-quality service, participants highlighted a failure on the part of commissioners, managers and other health professionals in recognising the problem of UI and in acknowledging the importance of continence for older people and prevalent negative attitudes towards continence and older people. Patient assessment and continence promotion regardless of age, rather than pad provision, were identified as important steps for a good-quality service for older people with UI. More rapid and appropriate patient referral pathways, investment in service capacity, for example, more trained staff and strengthened interservice collaborations and a higher profile within medical and nurse training were specified as being important facilitators for delivering an equitable and highquality continence service. There is a need, however, to consider the accounts given by our participants as perhaps serving the interests of their professional group within the context of interprofessional work. Conclusions: Our data point to important barriers and facilitators of a good-quality service for older people with UI, from the perspective of continence service leads. Further research should address the views of other stakeholders, and explore options for the empirical evaluation of the effectiveness of identified service facilitators.