BackgroundCompliant flooring, broadly defined as flooring systems or floor coverings with some level of shock absorbency, may reduce the incidence and severity of fall-related injuries in older adults; however, a lack of synthesized evidence may be limiting widespread uptake.MethodsInformed by the Arksey and O’Malley framework and guided by a Research Advisory Panel of knowledge users, we conducted a scoping review to answer: what is presented about the biomechanical efficacy, clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and workplace safety associated with compliant flooring systems that aim to prevent fall-related injuries in healthcare settings? We searched academic and grey literature databases. Any record that discussed a compliant flooring system and at least one of biomechanical efficacy, clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, or workplace safety was eligible for inclusion. Two independent reviewers screened and abstracted records, charted data, and summarized results.ResultsAfter screening 3611 titles and abstracts and 166 full-text articles, we included 84 records plus 56 companion (supplementary) reports. Biomechanical efficacy records (n = 50) demonstrate compliant flooring can reduce fall-related impact forces with minimal effects on standing and walking balance. Clinical effectiveness records (n = 20) suggest that compliant flooring may reduce injuries, but may increase risk for falls. Preliminary evidence suggests that compliant flooring may be a cost-effective strategy (n = 12), but may also result in increased physical demands for healthcare workers (n = 17).ConclusionsIn summary, compliant flooring is a promising strategy for preventing fall-related injuries from a biomechanical perspective. Additional research is warranted to confirm whether compliant flooring (i) prevents fall-related injuries in real-world settings, (ii) is a cost-effective intervention strategy, and (iii) can be installed without negatively impacting workplace safety. Avenues for future research are provided, which will help to determine whether compliant flooring is recommended in healthcare environments.

IntroductionFall-related injuries can have serious consequences for older adults, including increased risk of dependence in daily activities and mortality. Compliant flooring is a passive intervention that may reduce the incidence and severity of fall-related injuries in healthcare settings, including acute and long-term care, but few sites have implemented compliant flooring, in part because synthesised evidence about key performance aspects has not been available.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a scoping review to address the question: what is presented about the biomechanical efficacy, clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and workplace safety associated with compliant flooring systems that aim to prevent fall-related injuries? We will conduct a comprehensive and systematic literature search of academic databases (AgeLine, CINAHL, EBM Reviews, MEDLINE (Ovid), SportDiscus and Web of Science) and grey literature (clinical trial registries, theses/dissertations, abstracts/conference proceedings and relevant websites). 2 team members will independently screen records (first titles and abstracts, then full text) and extract data from included records. Numerical and narrative analyses will be presented by theme (biomechanical efficacy, clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, workplace safety).Ethics and disseminationThis scoping review responds to the information needs of healthcare decision-makers tasked with preventing fall-related injuries. This review will summarise evidence about compliant flooring as a potential intervention for preventing fall-related injuries in older adults and identify gaps in evidence and new avenues for research. Results will be especially useful in long-term care, but also applicable in acute care, assisted living and home care. We will disseminate the review's findings via open-access publications, conference presentations, a webinar, a Stakeholder Symposium and a Knowledge-to-Action Report.

The authors of this qualitative study set out to investigate self-assessment practices within the library profession. The researchers conducted semi-structured interviews with a purposeful sample of nine librarians coming from a range of library settings and possessing a diversity of library experience. Interviews were then transcribed and coded in NVIVO to identify emergent themes. This paper details some of the results of that study, highlighting motivations, limitations, and strategies with regard to selfassessment. The findings present a summary of a range of approaches to the practice of assessment as reported by the interviewees. One area of possible growth for our profession, as highlighted by the findings, is in the development of peer networks as a support for the individual practice of self-assessment. While the results of this small case study cannot be generalized, the authors hope these preliminary findings can open up the conversation around self-assessment both for individual librarians and for those librarians and managers working to shape their workplace culture.

No abstract

There is a trend in academic libraries to hire consultants for internal crises, change management projects, strategic planning processes, outcomes assessment, evidence-based decision making, information literacy instruction, and more. Although we hear informally about the use of consultants in academic libraries, the practice has gone unexamined. We employ a historical and linguistic analysis of consultants in academic libraries, using a critical framework for this research. A critical perspective provides a structure to discuss issues that librarians may not have been able to previously fit into library practice dialogue. A chronological history of consulting in libraries acts as our literature review. This review, along with a targeted examination of library and information science resources, is used to guide two lines of linguistic analysis. The first provides a critique of the core tenets used to define and characterize library consultants, namely, the claim that consultants are unbiased professionals who bring “expertise” and “fresh” ideas to libraries. The second analysis investigates the rhetorical strategies used in existing texts: polarizing language, straw man reasoning, and figurative and indirect language. The discussion section unpacks these linguistic strategies, reflects on what is missing from the texts, and considers how knowledge and power are exerted through language, making connections to the broader context of neoliberalism.