Resident attitudes regarding the impact of the 80-duty-hours work standards.

Abstract

The authors report on results from a survey assessing the attitudes of medical residents toward the American Osteopathic Association and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education duty-hour standards that became effective for all accredited residency programs on July 1, 2003. Data were gathered from 128 residents in four medical specialties: family medicine, general surgery, internal medicine, and obstetrics and gynecology. Participating residents worked at four teaching hospitals with allopathic, osteopathic, or dual-accredited programs. The dominant response of medical residents to duty-hour restrictions is clearly-though not uniformly-positive. Residents tend to agree that there are safety benefits for patients and quality-of-life benefits for themselves. A consistent pattern of positive responses toward the standards among internal medicine residents contrasts with less favorable responses among residents in general surgery programs. Gender differences are noted as well, with women generally more positive about duty-hour restrictions than their male colleagues. Male residents in surgery and obstetrics especially tend to agree that duty-hour restrictions could have negative effects on physician education with regard to their continuity of experience. The most consistent pattern in resident survey responses appears to be by medical specialty, perhaps reflecting variations in the nature of patient care and contact in each specialty.