This study examines the perceived causes of occupational stress amongst female Registered Nurses working in the clinical setting at both Calvary Public and Calvary Private Hospitals ACT Incorporated. A modified Gray-Toft, Anderson Nursing Stress Scale (1981) was used as the instrument for the research. The questionnaire was modified by the addition of six questions. The questionnaire was distributed to seventy female Registered Nurses. Twenty questionnaires were distributed to staff working within the Private Hospital and fifty to staff in the Public Hospital. Relevant data dating back to 1956 was examined regarding stress and burnout amongst nurses and allied health professionals. The results of this study, not surprisingly, supported the finding of Gray-Toft, Anderson. That is that nursing remains an inherently stressful occupation. Respondents working in both public and private hospitals indicated that Lack of Funding and Death and Dying were considered to be major sources of perceived stress. Registered Nurses working in the Public Hospital perceive higher levels of stress than do those Registered Nurses working within the Private Hospital with respect to relative staffing levels, workload and funding. Comparisons by age group indicated a generally higher reported level for the youngest age group. Comparison of full time versus part time staff indicated a significantly higher level of perceived stress from full time staff. Analysis of reported stress by ward type indicated that staff working in the "medical" groupings experienced higher perceived levels of stress than those working in the "surgical" groupings.

A quantitative survey was conducted in two Canberra hospitals that aimed at ascertaining the impact of information provided by medical libraries on clinical decision making. Specifically, this research study investigated clinical, cognitive and quality value of information provided by the medical librarians to the management of patients and doctors' ability to handle clinical cases differently as a result of such information. Furthermore, the relative value of information received from the library was assessed by comparing it to the value of information received from other sources in dealing with clinical problems. The research involved medical specialists and registrars affiliated with these hospitals. Doctors were asked to select any clinical situation which they frequently or currently encounter and for which further information would be useful to them. Once their information requests were identified, they were then asked to present such requests to the hospital library. In order to avoid any special treatment, participants were urged not to identify themselves to the library staff as partaking in the study. It was important that participants did not search for the information themselves. The doctors were asked to evaluate the material provided by the library in relation to clinical care and, thereafter, complete a short questionnaire. This research took place between October 1994 and March 1995. The questionnaires were sent to 288 doctors. This represented the total population of specialists and registrars affiliated with both hospitals at the time of the study. Analysis of the results is based on a 34% useable response rate. Medical specialists were by far the higher number of respondents (70%) as compared with registrars (30%). Eighty-one per cent of the doctors said that the information provided by the library refreshed their memory and 82% said that it would contribute to better quality of medical care. Eighty-six per cent indicated that some of this information was new to them and 99% said that the information provided was up to date. Ninety-four per cent said that the information provided by the library was of clinical value to them. As the result of the information provided by the library 75% of respondents would either definitely or probably handle some aspects of the clinical situation differently than they would have done it otherwise. The level of importance of the change for the optimal care of patients was assessed with 54% regarding it as important, 42% as moderately important. Specifically, as the result of the information provided, the doctors were able to change the following: diagnosis 10%, choice of lab tests 20%, choice of other diagnostic investigations 24%, choice of drugs 27%, choice of other management 58%, reduce length of hospitalisation 10%, post-operative care of patients 25%, advice given to patients 47%. On the basis of the received information the doctors were able to avoid the following: hospitalisation of patients 11%, risk of hospital acquired infection 8%, surgical intervention 19%, tests or other investigation 23%, additional out-patient visits 12%. Discussions with colleagues were reported to be most valued sources of information for the purpose of clinical decisions (59%), followed by diagnostic imaging (49%), librarian (45%), lab tests (42%) and patients' medical records (30%). The librarian's role as contributing to the process of clinical decisions was rated highly with 88% ranking it as either important or moderately important. The results of significance p test statistic performed at 0.05 significance level suggested that, for this study, there was a significant relationship between the frequency of library use and doctors' ability to change the choice of laboratory tests, diagnostic investigations, and the choice of prescribed drugs. The results of this research study demonstrate that medical librarians can positively contribute to clinical management of patients by providing timely and accurate information. Further research is recommended in order to determine the impact of the whole range of library services on health care outcomes.