1 in 7

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

cartoondoc

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
219
Reaction score
8
One of the things I found most detestable about medical training is the rule that you only are required to have an average of 1 in 7 days off. I know this is progress over the way things used to be in the "olden days," but I always felt like on a grueling medicine wards rotation, it was always like adding insult to injury that we never even got a full weekend to refuel.

Am I the only one who thinks this is totally ridiculous?

Members don't see this ad.
 
When I was a resident, back in the old days, we were lucky if we got 2 days off during an IM ward month.

1 day off in 7 almost makes me want to go out and do another residency

Yeah but didn't you get to smoke pipes while you were working? Probably evens out.
 
One of the things I found most detestable about medical training is the rule that you only are required to have an average of 1 in 7 days off. I know this is progress over the way things used to be in the "olden days," but I always felt like on a grueling medicine wards rotation, it was always like adding insult to injury that we never even got a full weekend to refuel.

Am I the only one who thinks this is totally ridiculous?

There's nothing about the 1-in-7 rule that precludes having a golden weekend. For every weekend you get off, you'll simply have to work an entire weekend another time. Over a 4-week rotation, you could even work 24 straight days and then get a 4-day weekend if you wanted. As far as I can tell, this has nothing to do with ACGME rules and everything to do with how your rotations are set-up.
 
There's nothing about the 1-in-7 rule that precludes having a golden weekend. For every weekend you get off, you'll simply have to work an entire weekend another time. Over a 4-week rotation, you could even work 24 straight days and then get a 4-day weekend if you wanted. As far as I can tell, this has nothing to do with ACGME rules and everything to do with how your rotations are set-up.

Ugh, don't even get me started on the "golden weekend".
 
There's nothing about the 1-in-7 rule that precludes having a golden weekend. For every weekend you get off, you'll simply have to work an entire weekend another time. Over a 4-week rotation, you could even work 24 straight days and then get a 4-day weekend if you wanted. As far as I can tell, this has nothing to do with ACGME rules and everything to do with how your rotations are set-up.

In my internship, we had something called a "golden weekend." It just meant you got ONE of the two weekend days off and didn't have to admit patients on the other day. I used to call it a "brown weekend."

Besides, having to work 12 days in a row to get a full weekend off really sucks.
 
I understand "black" weekend, but I really don't understand call it a "Golden" weekend. I refer to it as a "normal person" weekend. A few more hours until 1.5 days off. Then a black stretch for me.
 
I know this is progress over the way things used to be in the "olden days," but I always felt like on a grueling medicine wards rotation, it was always like adding insult to injury that we never even got a full weekend to refuel.

Now just imagine that instead of 3 years of IM with occasional inpatient ward months, you had to do 5 years of General Surgery with 100% inpatient ward months.

And imagine if the 80-hour workweek/30-hour shift/2-days-off-in-2-weeks rules got violated almost every rotation.

Bleak, huh? :eek:
 
...

Am I the only one who thinks this is totally ridiculous?

Maybe it's just me, but I didn't find the 4 days off a month rule all that oppressive. I have a hard time finding a justification for the 30 hour shift, and think that night float systems are superior to q4, but missing out on 4 weekend days/month wasn't what made internship hard. Most of the time the weekends in the hospital are considerably more chill than weekdays, and you usually get time to relax, study, and even play on computer/watch TV while manning the pager. If it wasn't a sunny day, you probably were spending a lot of the day doing what you would have done at home anyhow.

Coming from another field where the junior folks often put in substantial time over the weekend, I have to say that working one day on most weekends is pretty much expected for a young professional. It's frequently only the 9 to 5'ers who get to work for the weekend and spend those days off. So of all the things to gripe about in residency duty hours, I don't see this as one of the bigger ones.
 
Now just imagine that instead of 3 years of IM with occasional inpatient ward months, you had to do 5 years of General Surgery with 100% inpatient ward months.

And imagine if the 80-hour workweek/30-hour shift/2-days-off-in-2-weeks rules got violated almost every rotation.

I love the emergency department and our ~60hr work weeks and max of 22 shifts per month.
 
For those of you that don't see a weekend off as "golden", just try to remember what it was like before duty hour restrictions, which was when the moniker was adopted. I guarantee you that those residents considered those two days to be golden. I realize that we're not working bankers' hours nowadays, but there's something to be said for counting your blessings.
 
One of the things I found most detestable about medical training is the rule that you only are required to have an average of 1 in 7 days off. I know this is progress over the way things used to be in the "olden days," but I always felt like on a grueling medicine wards rotation, it was always like adding insult to injury that we never even got a full weekend to refuel.

Am I the only one who thinks this is totally ridiculous?

I simply don't know how anyone finishes medical school at all with the hours you have to keep. I don't know what exhausting a person teaches him/her.
 
... I don't know what exhausting a person teaches him/her.

The exhaustion is not what you learn from. It's the additional stuff you see by being in the hospital more that's what you learn from. Back in the day one attending used to bemoan q2 call because residents missed half the good cases. Now with the 80 hour rule, you miss a whole lot more than that. I'm all for a better lifestyle and agree that the current hours are more reasonable. I'm pretty happy with the duty hour restrictions as they stand now. But I'm not naive enough to think that I'm not learning less than those a generation before me who spent 50% more time in the hospital.

And FYI, it's not so much medical school hours we are talking about, but residency. There's a big difference.
 
The exhaustion is not what you learn from. It's the additional stuff you see by being in the hospital more that's what you learn from. Back in the day one attending used to bemoan q2 call because residents missed half the good cases. Now with the 80 hour rule, you miss a whole lot more than that. I'm all for a better lifestyle and agree that the current hours are more reasonable. I'm pretty happy with the duty hour restrictions as they stand now. But I'm not naive enough to think that I'm not learning less than those a generation before me who spent 50% more time in the hospital.

And FYI, it's not so much medical school hours we are talking about, but residency. There's a big difference.

Thanks for clarifying my mistake. I misspoke when I said medical school (not that that isn't difficult). I was actually thinking about internship and residency.

I'm sure you do learn more by being there more hours. I guess I don't understand how you can absorb it if you're tired.
 
... I guess I don't understand how you can absorb it if you're tired.

Do you absorb less when you are tired? No doubt. Do you absorb some decent percentage when you are tired? Absolutely. So it's this extra percentage that you gain by being in the hospital long hours. Some of my most memorable learning experiences have occurred at the end of long shifts or in the wee hours of the night. You don't get to choose when things are going to happen that will be of value to you. And getting a good experience when you are tired is better than not getting the experience at all.

And honestly, we are only working a maximum of 80 hours/week (averaged), which is really nothing to the 110 hours they regularly pulled a generation ago in some fields. The prior generation was ALWAYS exhausted because they never got a solid nights' sleep with that kind of schedule, and yet they amassed a ton of knowledge and came out of residency arguably better trained than those of us getting some amount of sleep with an 80 hour limit will. Again I'm not looking to push back to the old crazy hours system of our predecessors. But I do think you are kidding yourself when you argue that being too exhausted to learn is a good defense to long hours. People have worked longer hours in the past and learned more.

The only real argument regarding long hours is whether or not more mistakes get made and whether the number of mistakes offsets those made through additional handoffs if hours are less.
 
And honestly, we are only working a maximum of 80 hours/week (averaged), which is really nothing to the 110 hours they regularly pulled a generation ago in some fields.

Only a robotron would say so offhandedly "we are ONLY working a maximum of 80 hours a week". And thank you for pointing out yet another major pet peeve of mine spouted out by the old timer physicians who sold us all out. Nowadays, you have to be sick as **** to earn yourself a bed in the hospital. The days of staying in house for a whole week after a lap appy are long gone. Doing an ICU rotation in the "olden days" was probably as labor intensive as doing a rehab rotation in 2010. Comparing our 80 hrs to their 110 hrs is like comparing apples to spinach. You can't even say they are both round, that's how unequatable they are.


Most of the time the weekends in the hospital are considerably more chill than weekdays, and you usually get time to relax, study, and even play on computer/watch TV while manning the pager. If it wasn't a sunny day, you probably were spending a lot of the day doing what you would have done at home anyhow.

Only if! I don't know where you are doing your residency, but that is MOST CERTAINLY not how my weekends went during my internship. The weekends were absolutely brutal. Instead of seeing your regular 10-15 patients, you would now have twice that number since the co-resident on your team had to come in on the opposite day. If that wasn't enough, you had to learn the nitty gritty details of all the new admits from overnight that you never saw and present to the attending who was as cranky as you for having to come in on the weekend. Waking up on a Saturday morning in the dead of winter at 4:30 AM knowing you had 24 hrs of sheer brutal rampage awaiting you was enough to want me to drive off a ravine on the way to the hospital. Sadly, I didn't do my residency in Colorado so this wasn't an option. In an absolutely perverted twisted ironic way, I would crave for Monday mornings when the whole team would all be together again. How sick is that? Looking forward to Monday mornings???:eek:
 
Only a robotron would say so offhandedly "we are ONLY working a maximum of 80 hours a week". And thank you for pointing out yet another major pet peeve of mine spouted out by the old timer physicians who sold us all out. Nowadays, you have to be sick as **** to earn yourself a bed in the hospital. The days of staying in house for a whole week after a lap appy are long gone. Doing an ICU rotation in the "olden days" was probably as labor intensive as doing a rehab rotation in 2010. Comparing our 80 hrs to their 110 hrs is like comparing apples to spinach. You can't even say they are both round, that's how unequatable they are.

And this is my pet peeve. The 80 hour work week is a new policy, only in effect since 2003. Thus, there are scores of young attendings who trained under the old "no rules" schema when the patients were just as sick as they are now and regularly worked 100-120 hours/week. The change in acuity is not a recent thing (as those training now like to think) but happened over 25 years ago - a true generation ago.

Only if! I don't know where you are doing your residency, but that is MOST CERTAINLY not how my weekends went during my internship. The weekends were absolutely brutal. Instead of seeing your regular 10-15 patients, you would now have twice that number since the co-resident on your team had to come in on the opposite day. If that wasn't enough, you had to learn the nitty gritty details of all the new admits from overnight that you never saw and present to the attending who was as cranky as you for having to come in on the weekend. Waking up on a Saturday morning in the dead of winter at 4:30 AM knowing you had 24 hrs of sheer brutal rampage awaiting you was enough to want me to drive off a ravine on the way to the hospital. Sadly, I didn't do my residency in Colorado so this wasn't an option. In an absolutely perverted twisted ironic way, I would crave for Monday mornings when the whole team would all be together again. How sick is that? Looking forward to Monday mornings???:eek:

Here is where I agree with you. Saturday call was the worst - a ton of cross coverage patients, responding to phone calls about patients you knew little about, while responding to traumas, consults, putting in lines, possibly assisting on emergency cases (or for the lame attendings who would schedule non-emergent cases for the weekend) etc. all while having a skeleton crew of residents (all of whom had their own problems) and getting the privilege of going home Sunday afternoon, only to return in the dead of dawn on Monday.
 
Here is where I agree with you. Saturday call was the worst - a ton of cross coverage patients, responding to phone calls about patients you knew little about, while responding to traumas, consults, putting in lines, possibly assisting on emergency cases (or for the lame attendings who would schedule non-emergent cases for the weekend) etc. all while having a skeleton crew of residents (all of whom had their own problems) and getting the privilege of going home Sunday afternoon, only to return in the dead of dawn on Monday.

When I read this, I'm thankful there are people willing to put themselves through this.
 
The exhaustion is not what you learn from. It's the additional stuff you see by being in the hospital more that's what you learn from. Back in the day one attending used to bemoan q2 call because residents missed half the good cases. Now with the 80 hour rule, you miss a whole lot more than that. I'm all for a better lifestyle and agree that the current hours are more reasonable. I'm pretty happy with the duty hour restrictions as they stand now. But I'm not naive enough to think that I'm not learning less than those a generation before me who spent 50% more time in the hospital.

And FYI, it's not so much medical school hours we are talking about, but residency. There's a big difference.

I disagree with that statement due to:

1) You cycled patients WAY faster than people back in the days prior to the hour caps. Remember the day when cholecystectomies used to be a week stay? Now it's pretty much in and out. Lap colectomy now is pretty much a 3-5 day hospital stay, something that used to be a couple of weeks minmum. Psychiatric patients dont last more than 2 weeks in most units when in the past they used to spend months. OBGYN C-sections barely spend two days in a hospital.

2) Science doesn't go back, it goes forward. More diseases are identified over time and treatments get more and more complicated. Back in those days you gave a handful of meds for diabetes and blood pressure. Now you get a new med class/combination every couple of years. Winged Scapula, with all due respect there, you are right about the change but having a transition period but my condolences to those folks who were in residency in the last 5 years prior to the work hour limit. Heck, they are probably the reason why the hour limit got pushed, it's cause they couldnt take it and be safe anymore, as the case that prompted the hour limit in New York.

If you word what you are saying correctly, it should be: "I am way more things than my attendings did when they were a resident but not learning them as well as my attendings."

And btw... my weekends were like everyone else described... WAY WAY more brutal than weekdays. You covered ALOT more patients than on a weekday and for a longer period of time.
 
Winged Scapula, with all due respect there, you are right about the change but having a transition period but my condolences to those folks who were in residency in the last 5 years prior to the work hour limit.

Well, that's exactly what I'm talking about. Everyone here acts like they are the hardest working residents ever and that anyone who trained pre-80 hour work week was sitting around rounding on their appys on POD #7 and waiting for grandma to be admitted to a nursing home for her pneumonia. That was true a generation/25 years ago, but the acuity and short length of stay for patients has been stagnant for quite some time. My "generation" sent lap choles home the same or next day as well; lap colectomies within 2-3 days; this isn't a new invention. I accept your condolences, however. ;)

I don't blame current residents for thinking that because every generation thinks they are better than the one that came before. Like we used to tell medical students and interns, "don't complain about being tired because your Chiefs and attendings have worked longer and harder than you." Its still good advice.

Heck, they are probably the reason why the hour limit got pushed, it's cause they couldnt take it and be safe anymore, as the case that prompted the hour limit in New York.

Libby Zion died in 1984; the Bell Commission came about in 1989. That was a generation ago.

It wasn't until 2003 that ACGME made regulations for all residency programs. And let's not assume that Zion's case was soley about being overworked and tired. It was also about a patient who failed to admit she was using drugs and lack of supervision for junior residents. We could argue until the cows came home whether her death was caused by her dishonesty, a tired resident, lack of supervision, etc. You also have to wonder if her father hadn't been so well connected, if any changes would have happened at all. If anything, IMHO, that was the real sequelae of her death: residents have much less autonomy than they used to, even before the work hour changes.
 
I do think there's some educational value in 30 hour shifts. During my internship, my program actually made changes to move away from those shifts, and the residents were kind of against it. Yes, they are definitely horribly painful. But since a lot of our patients got d/c'd the next day, we got to follow them from their admission to their d/c. (Plus if you were efficient, there was a decent chance of getting sleep on call.)

So I could support the 30 hour shifts for that reason. But the 1 in 7 thing is just demoralizing. Having two days in a row off gives me a chance to reboot and face the rest of the week. And the worst is weekend calls where you're doing cross coverage too. Saturday call at my internship was the most dreaded call.

We all cling to ridiculous work hours (myself included) because we think there's learning value involved. But the truth of the matter is that we're cheap labor that's needed to cover the hospital around the clock and there's only a finite number of us. That's why we work so hard, not because The Powers That Be care soooo much about our education.
 
But the truth of the matter is that we're cheap labor that's needed to cover the hospital around the clock and there's only a finite number of us. That's why we work so hard, not because The Powers That Be care soooo much about our education.

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:
 
Libby Zion died in 1984; the Bell Commission came about in 1989. That was a generation ago.

It wasn't until 2003 that ACGME made regulations for all residency programs. And let's not assume that Zion's case was soley about being overworked and tired. It was also about a patient who failed to admit she was using drugs and lack of supervision for junior residents. We could argue until the cows came home whether her death was caused by her dishonesty, a tired resident, lack of supervision, etc. You also have to wonder if her father hadn't been so well connected, if any changes would have happened at all. If anything, IMHO, that was the real sequelae of her death: residents have much less autonomy than they used to, even before the work hour changes.

This, and not the drop to 80 hour work weeks, is why our generation of doctors is being seen as weaker compared to our previous generation. Residents are now being handcuffed and don't get a chance to learn on their feet. Training hasn't changed to catch up to this change yet, but it is coming. Surgery used to be learned by doing it live on a person the first time you ever did it and mistakes happened. Now with simulators becoming more and more prevalent, many residents, they could have done 100 lap choles in simulation before they even touch a patient, and thus will be better prepared. As a starting intern, I clearly want and long for the days where I get to be learning by doing, and hate simulation, but I understand that it is a better way to learn and get the skills. And now with mandatory "fundamentals of laparoscopy" to sit for boards that use simulators, and essentially mandatory simulator sessions, the surgical skills of residents should begin to return.
 
my dad( a prominent neurologist) did his internship in the 60's. he did pretty much 36 hrs on/12 off for a yr. he had 1 entire 24 hr period off that yr, the day I was born.
the next day his director wouldn't let him off long enough to drive my mom and I home from the hospital. now that is hard core. to add insult to injury the day he finished his internship he was drafted by the navy.
 
...
Only if! I don't know where you are doing your residency, but that is MOST CERTAINLY not how my weekends went during my internship. The weekends were absolutely brutal. Instead of seeing your regular 10-15 patients, you would now have twice that number since the co-resident on your team had to come in on the opposite day. ...

I guess it depends on how your teams are set up. If you are coming from a system of smaller teams, where one intern has the team pager and already has responsibility for all the patients, then the census doesn't double on the weekend it stays the same. But even if you are cross covering, the pace on a weekend day is slower than on a weekday. What changes is that a lot less happens on the weekend. Nobody coming out of the OR, fewer studies being performed, fewer attendings around asking you for things, fewer patients discharged because the nursing homes only want to take people during the week, etc. Things move at a snails pace compared to the week. You round, spend a few hours doing real work, and then it settles down pretty substantially.

Sure there are atypically crazy weekends, but I've found that not to be the norm, thankfully.
 
Last edited:
I guess it depends on how your teams are set up. If you are coming from a system of smaller teams, where one intern has the team pager and already has responsibility for all the patients, then the census doesn't double on the weekend it stays the same. But even if you are cross covering, the pace on a weekend day is slower than on a weekday. What changes is that a lot less happens on the weekend. Nobody coming out of the OR, fewer studies being performed, fewer attendings around asking you for things, fewer patients discharged because the nursing homes only want to take people during the week, etc. Things move at a snails pace compared to the week. You round, spend a few hours doing real work, and then it settles down pretty substantially.

Sure there are atypically crazy weekends, but I've found that not to be the norm, thankfully.


Except for Trauma or ED rotations... then all bets are off
 
The trauma rotation gets out of the whole "golden weekend" concept by banning weekends altogether.
 
And honestly, we are only working a maximum of 80 hours/week (averaged), which is really nothing to the 110 hours they regularly pulled a generation ago in some fields.

This is the lamest argument, and yet the most widely used. That we are "only" working 80 hours/week now, so basically we should be deleriously happy. Any time anyone complains, this is thrown in your face. I might even accept this argument, except for the teensy little fact that the 80 hours/week you spend at the hospital doesn't train you. That's right, you work 80 hours/week and then you're expected to go home and study because if you didn't you'd immediately fail your boards. Get that. Your residency program -- I don't care if you're at BID or Stanford or Johns Hopkins -- has you working 80 hours/week *wink wink* and if that's "all" you did you'd have the knowledge of a person who had Down's syndrome. And yet you're supposed to feel privileged.

My expectation is that at a training program I'd get trained. I know, crazy, right? I'm not there to be the support staff of a hospital. I'm there to get TRAINED. And every single program in every single specialty FAILS at this. But rather than point that out, we all sit around like numb nuts and go "residents are so lazy." No, programs are so pathetic.
 
My $0.02 on this, and my personal experience.

I was doing my 3rd year at my first school during the time prior to the instigation of the rules. I did general surgery as a student the way the residents did: q3 call, 2am lectures on the call night, with operating days being the post-call day. Days not on call, I was in the hospital with the interns at 430-5am, then out at the earliest 8pm. 5 days off in six weeks, with two days to travel back to the school for the shelf exam.

Medicine was even worse: 5am to 9pm on average, with call days going from 5am to whenever the next day, usually 9pm+. The lectures in the morning, noon, and in the late afternoon made the Marquis de Sade envious at the torture. It seems every time the teams got into the groove of getting work done, there was another lecture. For basic knowledge, I learn better from a book than a lecture by someone who drones. No days where we didn't go into the hospital.

My condition manifested during this time, and I had to leave USU and the service soon after.

Flash forward to 2004: when I transferred into school at the 3rd year level.

Surgery: Not allowed to go into the hospital before 6am, then we were usually done by 6pm. Call for the students was until 11pm due to mandatory lectures. While the attendings teased the interns and residents about having to be out at the 30-hour mark, I heard them being heart attack serious about it in reality. They knew they were under the microscope by pretty much everyone, as surgery supposedly is the specialty that crushed the soul with the hours. I got one day off in six (actually 36 hours, as we came in one weekend day until noon.) Never saw someone break the rules clinically. The only rule-breaker I know was the chief resident I had cloak me in my long-coat ceremony (started this school with surgery, and he was the first one I worked with.) He stayed in the hospital beyond hours to do it for me, and I got him out ASAP.

Medicine: Did time at two hospitals. While they were smiling on the floors (my first reaction: "Wait, am I on internal medicine wards? Aren't we all supposed to be miserable, frowning dregs?") There were still rules violation; I saw one resident stay well past the 30 hours on paperwork alone. Students didn't stay in the hospital overnight, as they had mandatory lectures every day. Same setup as surgery for students on the weekends; 36 hours off. The second hospital was much better. Despite me wanting to be in the thick of things, the interns and the resident of my team pretty much got me out at 5pm, and unless on call, stay home on the weekend, under the half joking threat of beatings. (my reaction: "WTF?!") I obeyed Rule #6 of surgery, (when told to go home, get the f*** out of the hospital.) This hospital was consistent, and *almost* had me thinking a medicine internship wouldn't be bad. No violations that I saw at this hospital.

Flash forward to surgery prelim 1 and 2 years: I scrambled to this program, and I was shocked at how well the program treated. Q4 call on average, with NY requiring you to be out by 27 hours, not 30. All lectures aside from journal club were scheduled to accommodate this (you were excused from journal club post-call.) Hours were usually 6am to 5-6pm. Residents made the call schedule, were accommodating to times as needed, and schedule at least 2 golden weekends a month Call was usually Friday and Sunday or Saturday 1 weekend, and either Thursday call (off for 3 days,) or work until Friday, then weekend off. Possibly one of the friendliest surgery programs I have yet to encounter. Our program director and our vice director (my mentor,) were almost fanatical about getting us out at the appointed time. We even had transitionals do electives in surgery for the hours.

Medicine/transistionals at this hospital were different. In at 6am (like we were,) but would work way later than I thought they should have. When I was on call, I would see medicine teams not on call still roaming the hospital until 9pm+. Their one day off was 24 hours precisely. Compared to us, they were beaten badly. Even as an intern, when transitionals that chose surgery as an elective, I would force them out of the hospital post-call at the appointed time, as I confided in my chiefs that these guys were lying through their teeth about hours. In my second year, *every* transitional chose surgery as an elective at *least* once, because we would enforce the hours.

The only time a surgery resident ever broke the hour limitations was during my second year; an intern who was doing the random timecards on the mandatory medicine ICU rotation (required by our program.) He logged 85-90hrs a week for most of the rotation. Man, was my PD and my mentor were honked at the medicine service for that. But they didn't admonish nor punish the intern for being honest. In fact, our PD, being a medical officer in the service for a few years, adhered to the Officer code: "I will not lie, cheat, or steal, or tolerate those who do."

As for academics: I will admit that my ABSITEs weren't the best, but the categoricals were pretty good. Every graduating senior got the fellowship of their choice; one got hearts at Cleveland, one got vascular at Strong in Rochester, NY, and the rest got minimal invasive fellowships anywhere from Virginia to California.

I think I had a unique experience, and I know I have seen most of this from a student's point of view. However, I could see improvement in morale, teamwork, cross coverage, and interpersonal skills from the point the hour limits hit. I know the limits go away when you become an attending, as everyone should be aware of. But I think the time limit force people to give high quality, to the point education.

I believe that sometimes rules present a challenge. The time rule challenges teachers to give the same quality or better education within the limited time they have. I have heard of programs clocking out to attend lectures "off the time rules." I fortunately have never been in one.

/end my $0.02
 
The exhaustion is not what you learn from. It's the additional stuff you see by being in the hospital more that's what you learn from. Back in the day one attending used to bemoan q2 call because residents missed half the good cases. Now with the 80 hour rule, you miss a whole lot more than that. I'm all for a better lifestyle and agree that the current hours are more reasonable. I'm pretty happy with the duty hour restrictions as they stand now. But I'm not naive enough to think that I'm not learning less than those a generation before me who spent 50% more time in the hospital.

And FYI, it's not so much medical school hours we are talking about, but residency. There's a big difference.


Keep in mind that call back a generation ago was a different story. While modern call call should be called "work", taking call back in the day really meant that you did other stuff and waited to be called. Hospitals were much slower moving places when when admissions could stretch on for weeks for even relatively minor issues that today are a day or two.
 
Keep in mind that call back a generation ago was a different story. While modern call call should be called "work", taking call back in the day really meant that you did other stuff and waited to be called. Hospitals were much slower moving places when when admissions could stretch on for weeks for even relatively minor issues that today are a day or two.

Keep in mind that when L2D is talking about the generation before, he is referring to those who trained before 2003 when the rules went into effect. The hospitals were not "much slower moving places" with multiweek admissions then and have not been so for 30+ years.
 
Keep in mind that this isn't the case. I'm not saying that in 2003 we were hospitalizing MI patients for three weeks and keeping them immobile or post-appendectomy patients were being admitted for days. But even since 2003 the advances in management and the changes in the acuity of patients are not to be ignored. I'm talking about the fact that laparoscopic surgery has advanced, that bariatric operations have become WAY more common and accepted, the rise of endovascular techniques in vascular patients, the technology that we see all over the place. It's undeniable. To act like 2003 is not that long ago just because it's only seven years is not accurate. The changes in the medical field for all specialties is accelerating.

And that's not to even mention that we have to deal with much more paperwork and administration. The amount of touchy-feely B.S. is rising exponentially, too. These days you have to sit around documenting six ways from Sunday why you have a Foley in place in some guy in the ICU. Uh, because I feel like it. Kiss my ass, hospital administrators.
 
...To act like 2003 is not that long ago just because it's only seven years is not accurate. The changes in the medical field for all specialties is accelerating.

And that's not to even mention that we have to deal with much more paperwork and administration. ...

Sure there have been some innovations in the last seven years, but nothing like you are describing, and so it's really not exactly an apples and oranges comparison. Laparascopic medicine already was widespread since the 90s, we already had MRI in all major institutions, hospital stays were pretty much the same duration, etc. Most of the big paperwork and administration changes (HIPAA etc) you are referring to happened during the Clinton administration and that ended in '01. So yeah, life in the hospital in '03 was VERY similar to that of today. Not a "slower moving pace" -- but identical. Except that the hours were drastically different. You guys are deluding yourself if you think that life has changed so much that 80 hours today means something different than 80 hours in 2003. You pretty much have to go back to the 70s to make your argument credible. I feel like you guys who weren't already in the workforce at the beginning of this century have some strange notion that 2003 was a different, simpler time. It wasn't. It was really just a few years back and if anything some of the tasks residents used to have to do have been eliminated in favor of computerized order entry and the like. You probably have LESS paperwork now than they had in 2003, actually. (But more than, say, 1973, which is a year for which your argument maybe might hold water.)
 
Last edited:
Uh, not really. The number of attendings who were facile with laparoscopy really wasn't significant in the '90s. Even today, much of laparoscopy, I dare say, remains with "basic" cases such as cholecystectomies and appendectomies. I'm not sure what MRIs have to do with anything, including length of stay, but OK. Like I said, I'd argue that even within the past decade we are dealing with sicker patients with higher acuity and doing things we wouldn't have done ten years ago.
 
... Like I said, I'd argue that even within the past decade we are dealing with sicker patients with higher acuity and doing things we wouldn't have done ten years ago.

You can argue it, but that doesn't make it so. And again we aren't talking 10 years ago, we are talking as recently as 2003. They were dealing with HIV, antibiotic resistant bacteria and the like, just like we are now. The baby boomer generation had already begun to reach geriatric age as of 2003. Same same same.
 
You can argue it, but that doesn't make it so. And again we aren't talking 10 years ago, we are talking as recently as 2003. They were dealing with HIV, antibiotic resistant bacteria and the like, just like we are now. The baby boomer generation had already begun to reach geriatric age as of 2003. Same same same.

Yeah, that's great. As recently as 2003 we weren't dealing with minimally invasive cardiothoracic surgery, we didn't have carotid stenting, we didn't have robotic colorectal surgery, we didn't even have chlorhexidine scrubs and preps. Speaking of antibiotics, we didn't have a lot of the newer antibiotics, like linezolid or zyvox. We didn't have VACs. I can go on and on and on.

If anything, YOUR saying it doesn't make it so.
 
Flash forward to surgery prelim 1 and 2 years: I scrambled to this program, and I was shocked at how well the program treated. Q4 call on average, with NY requiring you to be out by 27 hours, not 30. All lectures aside from journal club were scheduled to accommodate this (you were excused from journal club post-call.)

This is why. Your experience isn't representative because NY enforces duty hours as a law under the department of health, not a voluntary ACGME thing. So people take that really seriously in NY. Most other places it's wink wink nudge nudge.
 
Yeah, that's great. As recently as 2003 we weren't dealing with minimally invasive cardiothoracic surgery, we didn't have carotid stenting, we didn't have robotic colorectal surgery, we didn't even have chlorhexidine scrubs and preps. Speaking of antibiotics, we didn't have a lot of the newer antibiotics, like linezolid or zyvox. We didn't have VACs. I can go on and on and on.

If anything, YOUR saying it doesn't make it so.
robotic CRS is hardly the standard of care or commonly performed (i.e. only at a select minority of places).
I can't speak for 2003 specifically, but chlorhexidine preps in central line kits, thoracoscopic procedures and wound vacs were readily available in 2005 when I started residency. Linezolid too, I believe, as I learned about it in med school. Certainly there are a lot of new meds on the market every year, but many of them take years to be commonly used due to it taking time to get on hospital and insurance companies' formularies. Only a select few become adopted quickly.
I don't think patients are necessarily sicker now than ten years ago...but I do think they may have longer hospital stays now (due to abx therapy being more aggressive earlier in their hospital stay)...whether the overall mortality of all hospitalized patients is better now than in 2003 I don't know. There's a lot of patients who linger in an ICU for a long time and still never make it out of the hospital. I think compared to 15-20 years ago, it is.
 
You're right, robotic CRS isn't standard of care and actually a lot of people question its existence. Even laparoscopic CRS is considered "advanced," in the same vein, and outside of academic centers isn't common. Point is, there are advances being made all the time, such as with NOTES or single-incision surgeries, and I'm not saying they're standard or accepted. But you have to remember that laparoscopic surgery, which is considered no big shakes today, really isn't that old and even in the '90s was considered crazy. Speaking of ICUs, I'd argue that even ICU care has changed since the early part of the century.

Like I said, I'm not saying that all we had was aspirin in 2002. But I think it's also a falsehood for people to say stuff like "that was ONLY eight years ago, how different could things be??" Plenty different.
 
Yeah, that's great. As recently as 2003 we weren't dealing with minimally invasive cardiothoracic surgery, we didn't have carotid stenting, we didn't have robotic colorectal surgery, we didn't even have chlorhexidine scrubs and preps. Speaking of antibiotics, we didn't have a lot of the newer antibiotics, like linezolid or zyvox. We didn't have VACs. I can go on and on and on.

If anything, YOUR saying it doesn't make it so.

And all these things impact life on the typical resident how exactly? Most of us will complete residency now without any exposure to robotic colorectal surgery. We will use chlorhexidine instead of betadine, but so what. Is squeezing a stick so much more onerous than pouring a bottle onto gauze? At most institutions cardiothoracic surgery is still largely done open, just like in 2003. And unless you are going into vascular surgery, carotid stenting won't change your life as a resident in any appreciable way. Antibiotics change over the years, but again, whether we are talking about linezolid (which IS zyvox btw), which hit the market in 2000, or Tigecycline, which hit the market more recently, it really doesn't make your life appreciably different as a resident.

Sure there were advancements over the last seven years, but not such that life appreciably changed for residents since 2003. Not one iota. You are reaching here. If you are seriously trying to say that 80 hours of prescribing tigecycline and sending patients off to robotic colorectal surgeries is significantly different than the 80 hours residents in 2003 spent prescribing vanc and sending patients to manual colorectal surgeries, you are making a pretty specious argument, I'm afraid.

Nobody is disputing that new innovations happen over time. But your argument was that life is so dramatically accelerating thanks to new innovations over the last 8 years that you really cannot compare the typical hour spent by a resident in 2003 to that of today. That's just not so. And frankly, throwing around innovations like "robotic colorectal surgery" as the big change that makes the comparison an apples/oranges comparison, pretty handily undermines your argument here.
 
And all these things impact life on the typical resident how exactly? Most of us will complete residency now without any exposure to robotic colorectal surgery. We will use chlorhexidine instead of betadine, but so what. Is squeezing a stick so much more onerous than pouring a bottle onto gauze? At most institutions cardiothoracic surgery is still largely done open, just like in 2003. And unless you are going into vascular surgery, carotid stenting won't change your life as a resident in any appreciable way. Antibiotics change over the years, but again, whether we are talking about linezolid (which IS zyvox btw), which hit the market in 2000, or Tigecycline, which hit the market more recently, it really doesn't make your life appreciably different as a resident.

Sure there were advancements over the last seven years, but not such that life appreciably changed for residents since 2003. Not one iota. You are reaching here. If you are seriously trying to say that 80 hours of prescribing tigecycline and sending patients off to robotic colorectal surgeries is significantly different than the 80 hours residents in 2003 spent prescribing vanc and sending patients to manual colorectal surgeries, you are making a pretty specious argument, I'm afraid.

Nobody is disputing that new innovations happen over time. But your argument was that life is so dramatically accelerating thanks to new innovations over the last 8 years that you really cannot compare the typical hour spent by a resident in 2003 to that of today. That's just not so. And frankly, throwing around innovations like "robotic colorectal surgery" as the big change that makes the comparison an apples/oranges comparison, pretty handily undermines your argument here.

These setting hold a large chuck of the resident population vs. the number of attendings from the attending population. Meaning, yes private practice doesn't do those but as a resident you are more likely to encounter them.

As stated above... everything makes a difference. Laproscopic more common now a days meaning more time needed in the OR on the patient, even the fastest lap surgeon is not as fast an average experienced open non-lap.

It doesn't matter, no one will see the other side's opinion at this point.. just let the old dinosaurs die, those who dont adapt wont survive.
 
Law2Doc, many of those innovations changed the management of patients and allowed us to intervene on sicker patients. Which you'd know if you'd actually stop and think about it rather than try to think concretely like some five year old and act like I'm saying that "squeezing a stick rather than pouring a bottle onto gauze" made residency different. Try to demonstrate some critical thinking skills, OK?
 
These setting hold a large chuck of the resident population vs. the number of attendings from the attending population. Meaning, yes private practice doesn't do those but as a resident you are more likely to encounter them.

As stated above... everything makes a difference. Laproscopic more common now a days meaning more time needed in the OR on the patient, even the fastest lap surgeon is not as fast an average experienced open non-lap.

It doesn't matter, no one will see the other side's opinion at this point.. just let the old dinosaurs die, those who dont adapt wont survive.

Again, laparascopic surgery was already being performed in 2003 but sure, it's "more common" now. But so what. My point isn't that changes over time don't make a difference, but that the changes from 2003 to 2010 haven't made an appreciable difference in the life of a resident such that one can say that an 80 hour work week now has a significantly different meaning than one in 2003. It doesn't. You were doing pretty much the same thing as a resident in 2003 as today. Some of the drugs are new, you might be using betadyne instead of chloroprep. But by and large your daily activities were the same. The onslaught of increased paperwork happened prior to 2003 so it's not like we do more paperwork now. It is naive to say 80 hours now is harder than 80 hours was then or that things are accelerated today. You are kidding yourself if you think so. All of these arguments are great ones if you are comparing today's resident to one from 1975, 1985, maybe even 1990. But as you get closer to this decade all appreciable differences in the daily activities of a resident go by the wayside, to the point that life in 2003 and life in 2010 isn't all that different. Just the change in duty hours. So yes, those folks practicing in 2003 before the change did have it worse, because each hour was equivalent to ours yet they had more of them. That's all I'm saying. I'm not saying there aren't innovations or that more people aren't doing laparascopic surgery today or that we don't have a few new drugs to play with. I'm saying that the changes are minute when you are looking at the impact of the hourly role of the resident.

In terms of dinosaurs who won't adapt, I think the analogy is bad. In this case the dinosaurs (from 2003) had it harder, and adapted pretty well. It's the newer mammals that are whining about the hours.
 
Law2Doc, many of those innovations changed the management of patients and allowed us to intervene on sicker patients. Which you'd know if you'd actually stop and think about it rather than try to think concretely like some five year old and act like I'm saying that "squeezing a stick rather than pouring a bottle onto gauze" made residency different. Try to demonstrate some critical thinking skills, OK?

Dude, you are the one who pointed to "robotic colorectal surgery" as one of the big innovations that supposedly changed my life in the last 8 years. It's not me not demonstrating critical thinking skills in this thread.:rolleyes: You say things have accelerated dramatically in the last 8 years such that they changed management of patients, but your examples are sorely lacking. Which makes sense, because the things that changed over the last 8 years, although important, really haven't changed residency life that much. The resident of 2003 was doing pretty much the same as today, with pretty much the same amount of paperwork and scut, and working under a very similar system with equivalently sick patients and a long list of meds and procedures to choose from. Only appreciable difference was the hours. You can wax philosophic and say we are intervening faster and managing better, but honestly you have to go back a lot more years for that argument to fly. 2003 and 2010 were really not very different practice environments unless you happened to work in some obscure specialty where robotic colorectal surgery made an impact. But that's not residency.
 
You're a resident? And you don't know that things like EVAR really only became prevalent within the past decade and have allowed for intervention on patients at high risk for open operations? Same for carotid stenting. On the flip side, robotic CRS/NOTES/single-incision surgery takes FAR longer in "normal" patients, but is being pushed for purely cosmetic reasons. Point is, it eats up your entire day doing what you could do in an hour otherwise. Like I said, I can continue, but I sort of hope that I don't have to.
 
This is why. Your experience isn't representative because NY enforces duty hours as a law under the department of health, not a voluntary ACGME thing. So people take that really seriously in NY. Most other places it's wink wink nudge nudge.

I can only tell what I observed and heard. I suspect luck in pulling these places for training both in residency and in school.

There were still a few places that were wink wink nudge nudge in NY. At least on the rumormil, because on paper they were legit (and we know better.) The time sheets are samples of a month's rotations, not the whole year for any given resident, so cherry picking is possible. I suspect IM at my hospital was in that situation. My mentor (now PD of surgery,) called their director out on it at the end of my 2nd year after they hosed my intern on his ICU rotation. I left for my research fellowship, so I never heard of the fallout from it.

Though the school I went to in DC and its attached hospital, the surgeons took it dead serious. So did IM in the second hospital I went to in school.

So there are places outside of NY are above the board 100% with their reporting, wether it is from outside agencies or location (I know things in DC tend to have a high pucker factor.) I just find it disappointing that it sounds like they are exceptions, at least by hearing everyone here.

I have been comparing surgery to IM as they seem to be the bigger targets for enforcement (larger population.) There are specialities that never came close to 80hrs even before 2003, or so it appeared. There is a reason for the acronym, and it has been there longer than the last decade. I first heard about them from my senior attendings when I was a scrub/anesthesia tech 15 years ago, when I was getting interested in medicine, so it has been around a while.
 
You're a resident? And you don't know that things like EVAR really only became prevalent within the past decade and have allowed for intervention on patients at high risk for open operations? Same for carotid stenting. On the flip side, robotic CRS/NOTES/single-incision surgery takes FAR longer in "normal" patients, but is being pushed for purely cosmetic reasons. Point is, it eats up your entire day doing what you could do in an hour otherwise. Like I said, I can continue, but I sort of hope that I don't have to.

Again, you are missing the point. Sure there are changes in medicine over time. We all agree with that. But look at what the typical resident did each hour in 2003, and look what they do now. Guess what? Same. Innovations change things over time, but over a longer time than you seem to think. To a resident, the practice of medicine is very different now than it was in 1975, a bit less different than 1985, barely different than 1995, and not at all different than 2003. If you don't get that than you need to take a look at what life was like a mere 8 years ago. And not looking at some unique niche surgical specialty -- we are talking about the run of the mill resident.
I think I made my point (to deaf ears), and you certainly have not convinced me of yours. Good luck to you.
 
And not looking at some unique niche surgical specialty -- we are talking about the run of the mill resident.

That's what I was talking about. Apparently, you're not in surgery. Which means that this is all irrelevant to you.
 
blasphemy.jpg
 
And just think, when you are THAT tired, you see double of everything so you get to see twice as much!
 
Top