Effect Of Work-hour Restrictions Research Articles

Impact of extended duty hours on medical trainees

Many studies on resident physicians have demonstrated that extended work hours are associated with a negative impact on well-being, education, and patient care. However, the relationship between the work schedule and the degree of impairment remains unclear. In recent years, because of concerns for patient safety, national minimum standards for duty hours have been instituted (2003) and revised (2011). These changes were based on studies of the effects of sleep deprivation on human performance and specifically on the effect of extended shifts on resident performance. These requirements necessitated significant restructuring of resident schedules. Concerns were raised that these changes have impaired continuity of care, resident education and supervision, and patient safety. We review the studies on the effect of extended work hours on resident well-being, education, and patient care as well as those assessing the effect of work hour restrictions. Although many studies support the adverse effects of extended shifts, there are some conflicting results due to factors such as heterogeneity of protocols, schedules, subjects, and environments. Assessment of the effect of work hour restrictions has been even more difficult. Recent data demonstrating that work hour limitations have not been associated with improvement in patient outcomes or resident education and well-being have been interpreted as support for lifting restrictions in some specialties. However, these studies have significant limitations and should be interpreted with caution. Until future research clarifies duty hours that optimize patient outcomes, resident education, and well-being, it is recommended that current regulations be followed.

Paediatric cardiology fellowship training: effect of work-hour regulations on scholarly activity.

In 2003, work-hour regulations were implemented by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Much has been published regarding resident rest and quality of life as well as patient safety. There has been no examination on the effect of work-hour restrictions on academic productivity of fellows in training. Paediatric subspecialty fellows have a scholarly requirement mandated by the American Board of Pediatrics. We have examined the impact of work-hour restrictions on the scholarly productivity of paediatric cardiology fellows during their fellowship. We conducted a literature search for all paediatric cardiology fellows between 1998 and 2007 at a single academic institution as first or senior authors on papers published during their 3-year fellowship and 3 years after completion of their categorical fellowship (n=63, 30 fellows before 2003 and 33 fellows after 2003). The numbers of first- or senior-author fellow publications before and after 2003 were compared. We also collected data on final paediatric cardiology subspecialty career choice. There was no difference in the number of fellow first-author publications before and after 2003. Before work-hour restrictions, the mean number of publications per fellow was 2.1 (±2.2), and after work-hour restrictions it was 2.0 (±1.8), (p=0.89). By subspecialty career choice, fellows who select electrophysiology, preventative cardiology, and heart failure always published within the 6-year time period. Since the implementation of work-hour regulations, total number of fellow first-authored publications has not changed. The role of subspecialty choice may play a role in academic productivity of fellows in training.

Effect of Work-hour Restrictions and Resident Turnover in Orthopedic Trauma

The resident 80-hour workweek and the July phenomenon have raised concern regarding the continuity of care of orthopedic patients in teaching institutions and its effect on postoperative complications and mortality. This study examined the effect of resident work-hour restrictions and the July phenomenon on patient outcomes after hip fracture at a large academic institution. Seven hundred twenty-two patients (mean age, 76.7 years) sustaining 319 femoral neck fractures and 403 intertrochanteric fractures between 2000 and 2010 were identified. Analysis was performed before and after July 1, 2003, as well as for the month of treatment. No difference existed in the postoperative outcome measures of delay of surgery (P=.061), complications (P=.904), and mortality (P=.981) between patients treated before and after July 1, 2003. Patients treated after July 1, 2003, had a significantly higher median number of preoperative comorbidities (4 vs 3, respectively; P<.0005). Turnover months, July and August, showed no difference in the outcome measures of delay of surgery (P=.171), complications (P=.776), and mortality (P=.524) compared with other months. This study suggests that 80-hour workweek restrictions or resident turnover months have no effect on patient care with respect to in-hospital time to surgery, complications, and mortality. This success can be attributed to ancillary staff support, physician extenders, and well-designed patient care protocols.

EN

The purpose of this study was to describe Canadian general surgery residents' perceptions regarding potential implementation of work-hour restrictions. An ethics review board-approved, Web-based survey was submitted to all Canadian general surgery residency programs between April and July 2009. Questions evaluated the perceived effects of an 80-hour work week on length of training, operative exposure, learning and lifestyle. We used the Fisher exact test to compare senior and junior residents' responses. Of 360 residents, 158 responded (70 seniors and 88 juniors). Among them, 79% reported working 75-100 hours per week. About 74% of seniors believed that limiting their work hours would decrease their operative exposure; 43% of juniors agreed (p < 0.001). Both seniors and juniors thought limiting their work hours would improve their lifestyle (86% v. 96%, p = 0.12). Overall, 60% of residents did not believe limiting work hours would extend the length of their training. Regarding 24-hour call, 60% of juniors thought it was hazardous to their health; 30% of seniors agreed (p = 0.001). Both senior and junior residents thought abolishing 24-hour call would decrease their operative exposure (84% v. 70%, p = 0.21). Overall, 31% of residents supported abolishing 24-hour call. About 47% of residents (41% seniors, 51%juniors, p = 0.26) agreed with the adoption of the 80-hour work week. There is a training-level based dichotomy of opinion among general surgery residents in Canada regarding the perceived effects of work hour restrictions. Both groups have voted against abolishing 24-hour call, and neither group strongly supports the implementation of the 80-hour work week.

Three-Year Results of Mandated Work Hour Restrictions: Attending and Resident Perspectives and Effects in a Community Hospital

In response to the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education mandated resident work hour restrictions, our residency program used a night float system in 2003. We undertook a survey of attending staff and residents to assess its effects on patient care and resident education. An anonymous survey was administered to attending staff and residents 1 year and 3 years after work hour restrictions took effect. The areas of disagreement include: beneficial effect on education (residents vs faculty: in 2004, 87% vs 22%, respectively, P = 0.02; in 2006, 71% vs 22%, P = 0.03); beneficial effect on patient care (in 2004, 53% vs 10%, P = 0.03); and compromised continuity of care (in 2004, 27% vs 70%, P = 0.04; in 2006, 7% vs 89%, P = 0.0002). One area of agreement was that residents' quality of life had improved. Both disagreed that more errors were being made and that work hour restrictions should be mandated on practicing surgeons. Attending staff and residents have deeply held opinions regarding the effects of work hour restrictions. This reflects a continuing dissatisfaction with providing patient care and educating residents under a set of requirements that solely addresses resident sleepiness and fatigue.

The Effect of Work Hour Restrictions on the Education of Orthopaedic Surgery Residents

In 2005 the Academic Leadership Group of the American Orthopaedic Association surveyed orthopaedic program directors, chairs, and members of the Resident Leadership Forum to gather information about the effect of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education work-hour restrictions on resident education. We compared these results with a similar survey performed 2 years ago. Ninety-four program directors and chairs and 59 senior residents responded to this survey. Overall, the respondents thought the duty hour restrictions had a negative impact on orthopaedic residency education but less so than in the previous survey. This conclusion was based on perceived negative effects on professionalism, resident operative experience, continuity of care, and increased workload for the faculty. Senior residents who worked before and after the work-hour limitations were instituted were more concerned about the negative effects than junior residents. Residents did seem more rested and content but not better prepared or necessarily more attentive. Respondents were not of the opinion resident performance had improved as measured by perceptions of performance on standardized tests. Orthopaedic departments had adapted to the work-hour limitations by scheduling night float rotations, converting in-house call to home call, and by hiring additional personnel in the form of physician extenders.