Fewer Hours for Doctors-in-Training Leading To More Mistakes

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

proclus

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2011
Messages
78
Reaction score
1
Thoughts?

http://healthland.time.com/2013/03/26/fewer-hours-for-doctors-in-training-leading-to-more-mistakes/

Giving residents less time on duty and more time to sleep was supposed to lead to fewer medical errors. But the latest research shows that’s not the case. What’s going on?

Since 2011, new regulations restricting the number of continuous hours first-year residents spend on-call cut the time that trainees spend at the hospital during a typical duty session from 24 hours to 16 hours. Excessively long shifts, studies showed, were leading to fatigue and stress that hampered not just the learning process, but the care these doctors provided to patients.

And there were tragic examples of the high cost of this exhausting schedule. In 1984, 18-year old Libby Zion, who was admitted to a New York City hospital with a fever and convulsions, was treated by residents who ordered opiates and restraints when she became agitated and uncooperative. Busy overseeing other patients, the residents didn’t evaluate Zion again until hours later, by which time her fever has soared to 107 degrees and she went into cardiac arrest, and died. The case highlighted the enormous pressures on doctors-in-training, and the need for reform in the way residents were taught. In 1987, a New York state commission limited the number of hours that doctors could train in the hospital to 80 each week, which was less than the 100 hour a week shifts with 36 hour “call” times that were the norm at the time. In 2003, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education followed suit with rules for all programs that mandated that trainees could work no more than 24 consecutive hours.

In 2011, those hours were cut even further, but the latest data, published online in JAMA Internal Medicine, found that interns working under the new rules are reporting more mistakes, not enough sleep and symptoms of depression. In the study that involved 2,300 doctors from more than a dozen national hospitals the researchers compared a population of interns serving before the 2011 work hour limit was implemented, to interns working after the new rule, during a three-month period. The former group were on-call every fourth night, for a maximum of 30 hours, while the latter group worked no more than 16 hours during any one shift. They gathered self-reported data from on their duty hours, sleep hours, symptoms of depression, well-being and medical errors at three, six, nine and 12 months into their first year of residency.

Although the trainees working under the current work rules spent fewer hours at the hospital, they were not sleeping more on average than residents did prior to the rule change, and their risk of depression remained the same, at 20%, as it was among the doctors working prior to 2011 as well. And the number of medical errors the post-2011 doctors reported was higher than that documented among previous trainees. “In the year before the new duty hour rules took effect, 19.9 percent of the interns reported committing an error that harmed a patient, but this percentage went up to 23.3 percent after the new rules went into effect,” said study author Dr. Srijan Sen, a University of Michigan psychiatrist in a statement. “That’s a 15 to 20 percent increase in errors — a pretty dramatic uptick, especially when you consider that part of the reason these work-hour rules were put into place was to reduce errors.”

How could fewer hours lead to more errors? For one, interns reported that while they weren’t working as many hours, they were still expected to accomplish the same amount that previous classes had, so they had less time to complete their duties. According to the study authors, this may be leading to work compression, and that can increase the risk of errors or mistakes if residents don’t have as much time to make and re-check patient-care decisions. In addition, the pressure may be even greater for residents in many hospitals where the new restrictions on hours were not accompanied by funding to hire new staff to balance the workload.

“For most programs the significant reduction in work hours has not been accompanied by any increase in funding to offload the work. As a result, though many programs have made some attempts to account for this lost work in other ways, the end result is that current interns have about 20 less hours each week to complete the same or only slightly less work. If we know that timed tests result in more errors than untimed ones, we should not be surprised that giving interns less time to complete the same amount of work would increase their errors as well,” said study author Dr. Breck Nichols, the program director of the combined Internal Medicine and Pediatrics residency program at the University of Southern California in a statement.

Another source of errors occurred as one intern going off duty handed off his cases to another. With fewer work hours, the researchers say that the number of handoffs has increased, from an average of three during a single shift to as many as nine. Any time a doctor passes on care of a patient to another physician, there is a chance for error in communicating potential complications, allergies, or other aspects of the patient’s health; that risk is boosted when the transition occurs several times over.

In 2011, Dr. Zachary F. Meisel, a practicing emergency physician and an assistant professor of emergency medicine at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania and Dr. Jesse M. Pines, the director of the Center for Health Care Quality and an associate professor of emergency medicine at George Washington University wrote in TIME about how dicey more handoffs could be:

Shorter shifts mean more potentially dangerous handoffs, wherein doctors and nurses transfer the care of their patients to a new shift worker who is not as familiar with the patients’ histories and may be less emotionally invested in their care. Handoffs are notoriously fraught with miscommunication and are known to create opportunity for mistakes.
Their suggestion at the time was to encourage napping on the job to improve current problems in sleepy doctors, citing studies showing sleep improves performance and that instituting naps actually did result in more rest among medical residents. They write:

For those of us who trained under the old never-sleep, always-take-care-of-your-own-patients-at-all-costs, tough-it-out system, restrictions on work hours seem soft. Napping in the middle of a shift? That’s a sign of downright weakness. But this persistent macho attitude is part of the problem. Sleep science and studies of shift workers in non-medical disciplines have repeatedly shown that tired workers not only make more mistakes, but also often fail to identify their own fatigue. Letting tired doctors and nurses take naps, or even forcing them to, may be a workable solution.

The authors of the current study acknowledge that their findings are preliminary, and based on reports of depressive symptoms, sleep and medical errors that were reported by the residents themselves. They acknowledge that it may simply take time for the health care system to adjust to the new rules, since long hours have been so ingrained in medical training. But the results hint at some potential unintended consequences of the more restrictive hours that may need adjusting in coming years. Fewer hours at the hospital means less time for residents to train and learn the skills they need to care for patients; even the staple of resident training, the daily rounds, in which experienced physicians and residents visit each patient admitted to the hospital under their care to review learn from their care, have been cut short due to the limited hours that residents have on duty.

Figuring out the right balance between humane work conditions that promote the best learning environment for residents, and the highest quality of care for patients, may still be a work-in-progress. More research is needed to pinpoint what’s driving the uptick in medical errors and determining the best strategies for improving resident training to bring these rates down.
 
I'm not sure it's a function of fewer hours exactly. Medicine get's continually more and more complicated.


More frequent handoffs are probably a big factor in error rates here.
 
This is a very interesting problem. I agree with wholeheartedly in that hand-offs are likely the biggest part of this increase in errors.

On the other hand, thirty hour shifts are insane. I know for me personally... after 24 hours awake I function at an incredibly decreased level... not to mention one feels miserable around that threshold (for most people, I would guess). Staying awake that long is pretty unhealthy to boot.

I'm not sure how you strike the right balance between safety and humane hours. I would be interested in the opinions of the residents and attendings on this forum about this issue.
 
Less hours on call for interns also means less exposure to cases and a very less confident resident, that may never catch up on it by end of residency.
After that resolution came to place I've seen residents become less confident and aggressive for the most part( as always exceptions exist).
I was more agreeable with forced nap time on light work flow hrs.
Some specialties need more exposure for learning than others.
Some things you can't learn by reading ( taking floor call from nurses, dealing with constipation/headache/I want to talk to a dr at 2 am/ patient does not look good/ pay hr dropped/ etc and so on. )
 
...
Some things you can't learn by reading ( taking floor call from nurses, dealing with constipation/headache/I want to talk to a dr at 2 am/ patient does not look good/ pay hr dropped/ etc and so on. )

I would say the bulk of your learning during intern year(a lot more than just "some things") occurs at night when you are running the show on your own. Fewer hours of doing this means you won't be as well trained or confident in making decisions. Once you get out of med school, book learning takes a back seat to actual, on the job learning. (you still have to read, especially for boards, but the percentage that's applicable on a daily basis is smaller).

The handoffs issues are huge. IMHO, most of the errors in the system creep in here, when someone who barely knows a patient after a now shorter shift gives a weak sign out to the next person -- it's like the kids game telephone -- the message gets warped by the end.

Also most folks who have worked six day in a row strings of 13 hour night float shifts for a month while trying to sleep in the day will tell you it is more, not less tiring than a few 30 hour shifts each week followed by post call days. With the 30 hour shifts you are tired at the tail end of the shift. With the night float you are tired all the time.

Not to mention that there's no rule that you actually must go to bed when you are off service. The capping of work hours hasn't led to more sleep, it's led to interns trying to have lives in that "spare" time. Not the goal of the Zion case at all -- you get all the downside of less training and none of the benefits of being well rested.

Finally, I don't really see how the above author gets to the conclusion of napping being warranted here. They conclude that more time to sleep off service hasn't led to fewer errors, yet they persist with the notion that being more rested should be the solution. Actually if being better trained (with more hours logged) and handoffs are the real sources of error (and I suspect they are), then the fixes will likely be longer residencies (more years) and more overlap of personnel. Sleep was never the issue (it was even a red herring in the Zion case), and any "fix" that focuses on it is going to be doomed to failure.
 
Sleep was never the issue (it was even a red herring in the Zion case), and any "fix" that focuses on it is going to be doomed to failure.

With all due respect, and with the caveat that I have not completed a medical residency, I'd like to to ask - how can you say that?

Sleep-deprived brains simply cannot function as well as well-rested ones.

Do you genuinely feel that insufficient sleep was never an issue?
 
.

. Sleep was never the issue (it was even a red herring in the Zion case), and any "fix" that focuses on it is going to be doomed to failure.

Disagree, studies have shown that someone who's has gone without sleep for 24 hours functions like they are intoxicated. It's ridiculous to say that sleep deprivation doesn't increase errors. Just because you think you're awesome and haven't made mistakes at 24 hours awake, doesn't mean you have good enough insight at that point to know you've screwed up. Just because you might not be aware of any mistakes, doesn't mean they don't/ didn't happen, or that they aren't important.

Now whether or not the current system is any better or doesn't cause it's own set of problems (lack of adequate training with fewer hours, increased handoffs, etc ) is an entirely different issue.

There have been some good articles recently about how to possibly reduce some of the issues in the new system but I can't access them right now.

Physicians are a smart bunch and I think they'll be able to work out a system that protects patients, is a little more humane to residents, and still trains them in the current time frame.
 
With all due respect, and with the caveat that I have not completed a medical residency, I'd like to to ask - how can you say that?

Sleep-deprived brains simply cannot function as well as well-rested ones.

Do you genuinely feel that insufficient sleep was never an issue?

In the Zion case, the patient was not candid with the resident regarding the dangerous combination of party drugs and prescribed medications she was on -- the jury actually found her contributorily negligent. Nonetheless, her father, a prominent journalist campaigned in the media and got the hospital to cave and the state to enact duty hours. But the underlying error was never strongly grounded in lack of sleep.

So yes, insufficient sleep was not really the issue in that case and actually IMHO doesn't represent a particularly significant source of errors -- if you are at the end of a 30 hour shift you are very cognizant that you are tired and tend to double and triple check things -- something you don't do earlier on in the evening, but perhaps should. In my experience you make more errors earlier in the evening when you really aren't tired but are trying to move faster.

In terms of whether "sleep deprived brains" can function well, I again point out my experience that night float systems, the end result of these duty hours, are more, not less, tiring than sporadic long call shifts, and there is no evidence that people who work 80 hours a week and try to sleep during the day get as much or the same quality of sleep as those who do a few 30 hour shifts a week but get postcall days and generally stay on a diurnal schedule. And also no requirement that those with more hours off each week spend those hours sleeping. so you really just increase the number of days a week residents are dragging IMHO.
 
Disagree, studies have shown that someone who's has gone without sleep for 24 hours functions like they are intoxicated. It's ridiculous to say that sleep deprivation doesn't increase errors. Just because you think you're awesome and haven't made mistakes at 24 hours awake, doesn't mean you have good enough insight at that point to know you've screwed up. Just because you might not be aware of any mistakes, doesn't mean they don't/ didn't happen, or that they aren't important.

Now whether or not the current system is any better or doesn't cause it's own set of problems (lack of adequate training with fewer hours, increased handoffs, etc ) is an entirely different issue.

There have been some good articles recently about how to possibly reduce some of the issues in the new system but I can't access them right now.

Physicians are a smart bunch and I think they'll be able to work out a system that protects patients, is a little more humane to residents, and still trains them in the current time frame.

These studies have been discussed ad nauseum in pre-allo and actually have a lot of problems from a scientific research perspective. There is a lot of agenda-based bad science out there. Anyone who both has experience working 30+ hour shifts and being intoxicated can tell you they are quite different animals. 🙄 back in the days when residents worked 120 hours a week and longer than 30 hour shifts the error rates really weren't all that different than they are today, when interns can't be in the hospital longer than 16 hours in a row and 80 hours a week. We aren't talking about a bunch if drunks trying to care for patients, sorry.

Whether it is more "humane" to residents is a totally different line of discussion than being a danger to patients and really needs to be kept separate. However I will tell you having worked under both night float and 30 hour call systems that the latter was much less tiring and IMHO more humane for the 5 days a week you weren't on call. I think most residents, given a choice between the two systems, would choose the long call system over night float. Basically ripping a bandaid off fast versus slowly. So notions of what is humane need to be tempered by perspective here -- until you have tried night float versus call I wouldn't be so quick to jump on either bandwagon as more humane.

In my personal experience, night float is very much a "careful what you wish for" cautionary tale. Sounded great on paper but in practice your life as an intern was much much better before the most recent duty hour change (limiting the call shift length from 30 hours to 16 for interns). Take it from those of us who were training during the transitional years and had personal exposure to both systems. And since it doesn't seem to have benefitted the patients in terms of errors (for the multitude of reasons described above) and hurt your training to boot, it's very much lose-lose.
 
Last edited:
As far as I'm concerned, both systems suck, and I feel/felt exhausted regardless. And one thing that isn't mentioned in the article but that greatly adds to my shift schedule misery is the constant flipping back and forth between days and nights. It takes me about 3-4 days to get over feeling jet lagged and adjust to the shift schedule I'm on. That's about how long I have until, bam, I'm transitioned back. I'd much rather do a few weeks of night shifts in a row than have to keep flipping back and forth every week.

FWIW, L2D is correct that the Libby Zion case had nothing to do with the sleep deprivation of the residents involved. It happened mainly because the residents and their attending, to whom they spoke by phone, didn't recognize the possibility of causing serotonin syndrome by giving meperidine (a serotonergic opiate) to someone who was already taking phenelzine (an MAOI inhibitor, which inhibits the breakdown of serotonin). So if you're going to take anything away from that case, read up on serotonin syndrome, consider it in your differential for a hyperthermic patient, and teach your juniors about it. That case was an M&M mistake that should never be repeated.
 
neophyte here, but i met my fiancee halfway through her intern year, and she was the last class to have 30 hour call. it sure does sound sucky either way but it seemed less sucky with the old way. all that learning aside i think she actually got more sleep with q4 call.

i hope the system reverts to what it was by the time ivstart residency.
 
I agree that the Zion case really wasn't a sleep deprivation issue.

. We aren't talking about a bunch if drunks trying to care for patients, sorry.

I didn't equate it to a bunch of drunks and as someone who routinely has 1-2 days a week where I'm awake and going for 24 hours, I agree it's a bit different than intoxication. Different doesn't mean less harmful to patients, it's still impaired. The fact remains that sleep deprivation negatively affects cognitive function. That's not something you can argue against.

Second, error reporting systems are rife with problems. Medicine is changing very rapidly, with doctors being responsible for more patients, higher complexity patients, and more technology and information to deal with. The two time points aren't really comparing apples to apples. We can only document what's detected and that's usually going to be the more major stuff. Being impaired, you're less likely to realize a mistake has been made. It might not be something that kills a patient, but slows recovery or delays diagnosis instead and those are still important errors.

Nowhere in my post did I argue for either system. I really don't like frequent handoffs as there tends to be great variability in the quality of handoffs depending on the person giving them. Even just in my current roles I get frustrated not seeing the end of cases to see how they went, but I can stay on my own without penalty to find out. It's probably going to really piss me off in residency not being able to do that while staying work hours compliant in some cases.

Given my experience working overnights then grad school during the day, I suspect I'd probably actually prefer working a schedule with long call instead of night float. I also agree with Q that the yo-yo ing is big exhaustion factor as well.

I'm also going to disagree that the patient safety issue and the humane treatment of residents are completely separate issues. I think they should be mostly dealt with separately, but there is an interplay that needs to be considered. Humane treatment of residents reduces burnout and burnout contributes to medical errors and poorer patient care. Burnout increases physician turnover which also isn't good for patients and costs the system a major investment.

I suspect the answer isn't a return to the old system, nor keeping the current system. I also agree with the idea that some specialty specific options might work better than a one size fits all approach. It would have been better if some pilot programs had been put in place and tested before any decisions were made on changing the hours/format. Now doing the research is apparently quite a bit harder because it requires getting exemptions.

I can't remember the journal, but an article I read recently talked about possibilities for changing schedules to allow more continuity both between provider and patient and resident and attendings to facilitate better continuity, more patient ownership, and teaching/supervision. I think approaches like these are heading in the right direction.
 
I agree that the Zion case really wasn't a sleep deprivation issue.



I didn't equate it to a bunch of drunks and as someone who routinely has 1-2 days a week where I'm awake and going for 24 hours, I agree it's a bit different than intoxication. Different doesn't mean less harmful to patients, it's still impaired. The fact remains that sleep deprivation negatively affects cognitive function. That's not something you can argue against.

Second, error reporting systems are rife with problems. Medicine is changing very rapidly, with doctors being responsible for more patients, higher complexity patients, and more technology and information to deal with. The two time points aren't really comparing apples to apples. We can only document what's detected and that's usually going to be the more major stuff. Being impaired, you're less likely to realize a mistake has been made. It might not be something that kills a patient, but slows recovery or delays diagnosis instead and those are still important errors.

Nowhere in my post did I argue for either system. I really don't like frequent handoffs as there tends to be great variability in the quality of handoffs depending on the person giving them. Even just in my current roles I get frustrated not seeing the end of cases to see how they went, but I can stay on my own without penalty to find out. It's probably going to really piss me off in residency not being able to do that while staying work hours compliant in some cases.

Given my experience working overnights then grad school during the day, I suspect I'd probably actually prefer working a schedule with long call instead of night float. I also agree with Q that the yo-yo ing is big exhaustion factor as well.

I'm also going to disagree that the patient safety issue and the humane treatment of residents are completely separate issues. I think they should be mostly dealt with separately, but there is an interplay that needs to be considered. Humane treatment of residents reduces burnout and burnout contributes to medical errors and poorer patient care. Burnout increases physician turnover which also isn't good for patients and costs the system a major investment.

I suspect the answer isn't a return to the old system, nor keeping the current system. I also agree with the idea that some specialty specific options might work better than a one size fits all approach. It would have been better if some pilot programs had been put in place and tested before any decisions were made on changing the hours/format. Now doing the research is apparently quite a bit harder because it requires getting exemptions.

I can't remember the journal, but an article I read recently talked about possibilities for changing schedules to allow more continuity both between provider and patient and resident and attendings to facilitate better continuity, more patient ownership, and teaching/supervision. I think approaches like these are heading in the right direction.

The bottom line is still going to be that hospitals need the resident man hours to care for their patients, and so people are going to need to work a lot of hours a week, with a lot of them at night. So either call or night float, pick your poison. There simply int another alternative given the number of warm bodies in the system and the amount of ground that needs to be covered. Additionally, you learn the most about patient care when it's just you against the world at night, so minimizing night coverage is a huge problem in terms if training. As is cutting down hours -- you don't learn hat you don't see. Which perhaps leaves extending residency by a year as a viable alternative but I don't see residents excited about that.

I actually don't think "resident burnout" is a real problem and certainly doesn't impact interns and junior year residents who are the sources of the largest share of errors.

And yes, I think you absolutely have to separate out goals of being humane from patient safety issues. Because I think what seems humane as a premed or med student and what is preferred as a resident are actually very different things here. Most residents would prefer a few long call shifts a week to night float. Most residents would like the opportunity to stay on for certain lectures and once in a career cases despite duty hour caps. Duty hours simply don't work for certain specialties. And as you get later in your training, seeing more starts to be more and more important to you, as you realize what little training you have left, so your desire to be home in bed gets supplanted by your desire to do one more of X procedure before you graduate.

And most residents aren't going to run home and go to bed when you let them out early on a Saturday night, so the notion of better rested doctors thanks to duty hours is misguided anyhow. This change has not been shown to help patients, and has screwed over more than a few residents in their effort to be well trained. So the fact that it sounds more palatable to the premeds who never tried to work such a schedule, and who buy into bogus junk science agenda-pushing articles which equate a 30 hour shift to intoxication is sad, and not persuasive to those who have walked the walk.
 
I'm not sure you actually read my post for comprehension. I have a great deal of respect for the contributions you make on here, but sometimes it seems like you post for the sake of reposting long posts about your views even if they aren't in response to what was actually said. Also, the way things are, the way things should be, and the way things feasibly could be are three completely different beasts.

For example: At no point in my posts did I argue for working fewer nights, or cutting down total hours. I've worked nights in my current job for almost 4 years and the skill set I've developed happened much faster than my colleagues on the day shift. In fact, our night team regularly has day shifters who've worked there twice as long ask us for troubleshooting advice. I think learning to think on your feet and solve problems when someone isn't readily available to jump in and figure it out for you is vital. But yeah, I didn't say anything about nights.

The bottom line is still going to be that hospitals need the resident man hours to care for their patients, and so people are going to need to work a lot of hours a week, with a lot of them at night. So either call or night float, pick your poison. There simply int another alternative given the number of warm bodies in the system and the amount of ground that needs to be covered. Additionally, you learn the most about patient care when it's just you against the world at night, so minimizing night coverage is a huge problem in terms if training. As is cutting down hours -- you don't learn hat you don't see. Which perhaps leaves extending residency by a year as a viable alternative but I don't see residents excited about that.

And
I actually don't think "resident burnout" is a real problem and certainly doesn't impact interns and junior year residents who are the sources of the largest share of errors.

Just because YOU don't think it is, doesn't mean it isn't. Please go on the residency forum and say you don't think resident burnout is a problem and doesn't impact interns and juniors. As for burned out residents and errors, I've seen this first hand and it has been documented that burnout causes errors and poorer patient care. Burnout can cause residents to take unsafe shortcuts, document exams they didn't do, strain relationships in the team, & cause poor communication with patients. All of which increase the risk of errors.

I was addressing physician burnout as a whole though, not just resident burnout. Studies have shown that a significant loss of empathy occurs throughout the course of residency. Some of that is avoidable and some isn't. That negatively affects patient care. Physician burnout can begin in residency and build as one enters practice.


And here you again don't seem to have read what I actually wrote..
Because I think what seems humane as a premed or med student and what is preferred as a resident are actually very different things here. Most residents would prefer a few long call shifts a week to night float.
Wholeheartedly said:
Given my experience working overnights then grad school during the day, I suspect I'd probably actually prefer working a schedule with long call instead of night float. I also agree with Q that the yo-yo ing is big exhaustion factor as well.

Same thing here. I would rather be able to stay and finish providing care, see what happened, etc:
Most residents would like the opportunity to stay on for certain lectures and once in a career cases despite duty hour caps. Duty hours simply don't work for certain specialties. And as you get later in your training, seeing more starts to be more and more important to you, as you realize what little training you have left, so your desire to be home in bed gets supplanted by your desire to do one more of X procedure before you graduate.

While I said:
Wholeheartedly said:
Even just in my current roles I get frustrated not seeing the end of cases to see how they went, but I can stay on my own without penalty to find out. It's probably going to really piss me off in residency not being able to do that while staying work hours compliant in some cases.

So the fact that it sounds more palatable to the premeds who never tried to work such a schedule, and who buy into bogus junk science agenda-pushing articles which equate a 30 hour shift to intoxication is sad, and not persuasive to those who have walked the walk.

And when someone highly educated as both a lawyer and a physician has to default to saying that since you are just a pre-med or med student, so your points are invalid, you kinda lose credibility. Just because one of the articles might've had issues, doesn't mean the numerous articles demonstrating the effects of sleepiness in both medicine and other fields are wrong. I also really hope you don't think that people on the opposite side of the equation don't have agenda's as well. I mean we could have more bodies to provide care and reduce handoffs, but hey that would cost them money they aren't willing to provide.

I haven't worked that schedule as a resident, obviously, but I work with tons of residents, I've seen them talk about this, I've seen them make errors because of exhaustion, and I have spent the last 3 years having at least one day week, usually two where I'm awake for 24 hours, so I do have some experience with that and the impact it has.

Comparisons of error rates pre and post changes are going to be difficult to do well regardless because the new system introduced a whole new set of factors, like increasing handoffs, that can mask any benefit gained from trying to address the sleep issue. Despite researcher's best efforts, completely eliminating those masking effects is going to be difficult.

However, as I stated earlier, I'm not actually in favor of the new system, nor do I think the old one was great. My main point was that all other issues aside, sleep deprivation does cause poorer patient care. As I noted earlier, I think it's unfortunate that changes were implemented without evidence from pilot studies and whatnot to support a net benefit to patients.

As for sad, tell me, if you stood both of us up in front of a room full of highly educated people and I stated "I think sleep deprivation and being awake for 30 hours causes cognitive impairment" and you stood up in front of the room and said "I don't think sleep deprivation and being awake for 30 hours causes any cognitive impairment." Who do you think those people would view as sad? Me, or someone so dogmatic and stuck in their views that common sense seems to have completely vanished.

The unfortunate thing in all of this is that you completely glossed over the part where I noted that people are trying to work on schedules that can give a bit of a break to the residents, while still training them effectively, and that reduce patient handoffs. Some of the ideas that are being posed (and more importantly actually tested for effectiveness) show a good deal of potential for addressing some of these issues.
 
While i replied to your post, some of what i wrote was responsive to things others on here wrote, which is why it perhaps seemed like I was ignoring certain aspects of your post, sorry. However I'm not sure the whole "I know what I'm talking about because I know plenty of residents" and have worked night shifts in other jobs argument is a good proxy for not having the same vantage point. But hey, believe what you want -- your mind will change soon enough when you get here.
As for your last sentence about "glossing over" the solutions to training and handoffs, I think you really do need to be in residency to have a better handle on why longterm immersion works and why you can never really replace quantity time with quality time. It nice to believe in easy fixes, but as I've been dancing around, the goals of adequate training, patient care, humane lifestyles, and sleep aren't going to nicely dovetail, and in the end the folks lobbying for humane schedules and sleep maybe need to be a bit closer to the issue. Just my two cents. You don't have to buy it.
 
However I'm not sure the whole "I know what I'm talking about because I know plenty of residents" and have worked night shifts in other jobs argument is a good proxy for not having the same vantage point. But hey, believe what you want -- your mind will change soon enough when you get here.

I wasn't intending to imply it was a good proxy for residency. My apologies if it came across that way. I would never assume to know what being a resident is like. I was only pointing out I'm not a naive premed like some of the 19-20 yr old volunteers I work a side gig with who freak out about working an 8 hour overnight shift once a month and think it's the end of the world. I have no clue what it's like to be a resident, but I do know what it's like to be awake and going for 24+ hours every single week at less intense endeavors so I do know the effect it has on cognitive function. I'd imagine it only gets worse on a residents schedule. I also didn't just say from observing residents, but also listening to what they have to say about all of this, which I agree definitely doesn't compare to experiencing it firsthand.

*So my apologies again if it seems like I'm trying to say my experiences are somehow equivalent to a residents. I'm not, just trying to engage in a discussion with someone more knowledgable while trying to frame my perspective within the context of the experiences I do have.*

As for your last sentence about "glossing over" the solutions to training and handoffs, I think you really do need to be in residency to have a better handle on why longterm immersion works and why you can never really replace quantity time with quality time. It nice to believe in easy fixes, but as I've been dancing around, the goals of adequate training, patient care, humane lifestyles, and sleep aren't going to nicely dovetail, and in the end the folks lobbying for humane schedules and sleep maybe need to be a bit closer to the issue. Just my two cents. You don't have to buy it.

Being a resident would give me a better handle on the specifics, but the fact that I know even now that I'd prefer to not stop certain patient care activities just because a clock tells me I have to means I do have at least some understanding of the fact that what's easiest for me isn't going to be best for patients or my future knowledge base. I'm not looking for an easy way out or a cush residency schedule if it means being less competent when I'm on my own. I see people here slide by with the minimum and then I see people, I imagine like you, who are pushing to get every last bit of knowledge out of training so that they do the best job they can once they leave. I'd rather be in the latter group.

I agree, it isn't possible to dovetail all of the issues into a neat pretty solution. Unfortunately the ACGME caved to outside pressure before more evidence based solutions could be implemented. They might have felt they had to before one of those outside interests decided to come in to regulate things for them, which could have resulted in an even less ideal situation for residents (I'm picturing a 40 hr work week with residency lasting twice as long...🙁 )

So while the system now has the limitations you mentioned like not enough hours to learn what you need, having to "clock out" before finishing patient care or educational activities, and increased errors from handoffs. Hopefully some of the solutions being posed for this system will be a step in the right direction since I don't think the ACGME will allow things to go back to the old way.

I guess that's what I should have emphasized when I was posting. Given that we have a less than ideal situation currently, and that the powers that be probably won't let things go back to the way they used to be, there are solutions that might help, though definitely not fix everything that's wrong with this new system. That's probably the biggest difference in our viewpoints, you're going for the best solution for training overall and I'm going for what people are suggesting we might be able to do in this new system we seem stuck with.

So with that in mind and to head back to the OP's original discussion... based on your experience with both systems if you could design your own residency set up, how would it work? Would you have each specialty set-up with the same guidelines? Would it be graduated by PGY year?
 
Last edited:
I actually don't think "resident burnout" is a real problem.
I do, because I'm living it, and have been living it pretty much since I started residency. That being said, I do agree that burnout is at most only a single factor that contributes to people making errors, and also that poor signouts are one of the banes of my existence - even moreso than being sleep deprived and disliking my job.

So with that in mind and to head back to the OP's original discussion... based on your experience with both systems if you could design your own residency set up, how would it work? Would you have each specialty set-up with the same guidelines? Would it be graduated by PGY year?
I have no idea, and at this point, I'm too tired and apathetic to give a flying rip.
 
I wasn't intending to imply it was a good proxy for residency. My apologies if it came across that way. I would never assume to know what being a resident is like. I was only pointing out I'm not a naive premed like some of the 19-20 yr old volunteers I work a side gig with who freak out about working an 8 hour overnight shift once a month and think it's the end of the world. I have no clue what it's like to be a resident, but I do know what it's like to be awake and going for 24+ hours every single week at less intense endeavors so I do know the effect it has on cognitive function. I'd imagine it only gets worse on a residents schedule. I also didn't just say from observing residents, but also listening to what they have to say about all of this, which I agree definitely doesn't compare to experiencing it firsthand.

*So my apologies again if it seems like I'm trying to say my experiences are somehow equivalent to a residents. I'm not, just trying to engage in a discussion with someone more knowledgable while trying to frame my perspective within the context of the experiences I do have.*



Being a resident would give me a better handle on the specifics, but the fact that I know even now that I'd prefer to not stop certain patient care activities just because a clock tells me I have to means I do have at least some understanding of the fact that what's easiest for me isn't going to be best for patients or my future knowledge base. I'm not looking for an easy way out or a cush residency schedule if it means being less competent when I'm on my own. I see people here slide by with the minimum and then I see people, I imagine like you, who are pushing to get every last bit of knowledge out of training so that they do the best job they can once they leave. I'd rather be in the latter group.

I agree, it isn't possible to dovetail all of the issues into a neat pretty solution. Unfortunately the ACGME caved to outside pressure before more evidence based solutions could be implemented. They might have felt they had to before one of those outside interests decided to come in to regulate things for them, which could have resulted in an even less ideal situation for residents (I'm picturing a 40 hr work week with residency lasting twice as long...🙁 )

So while the system now has the limitations you mentioned like not enough hours to learn what you need, having to "clock out" before finishing patient care or educational activities, and increased errors from handoffs. Hopefully some of the solutions being posed for this system will be a step in the right direction since I don't think the ACGME will allow things to go back to the old way.

I guess that's what I should have emphasized when I was posting. Given that we have a less than ideal situation currently, and that the powers that be probably won't let things go back to the way they used to be, there are solutions that might help, though definitely not fix everything that's wrong with this new system. That's probably the biggest difference in our viewpoints, you're going for the best solution for training overall and I'm going for what people are suggesting we might be able to do in this new system we seem stuck with.

So with that in mind and to head back to the OP's original discussion... based on your experience with both systems if you could design your own residency set up, how would it work? Would you have each specialty set-up with the same guidelines? Would it be graduated by PGY year?

First, I think being up as a resident is very different than just being up for 24 hours at a regular job because of the adrenaline factor. It not like working the night shift at a convenience store. It's like working the night shift at a convenience store in a very bad neighborhood that gets robbed multiple times daily. Always on high alert. You won't feel tired throughout your shifts, just the very slow part, which sometimes never happen.

Second, I think with continued push for more humane schedules and pressure from folks outside the profession who don't really understand what it takes to train a doctor and who buy into the "tired = more errors" notion, ultimately residency hours will continue to go down and years of training will have to go up. Which ironically is going to suck far worse for residents than doing 100 hours a week for a much shorter interval.

As to your question as to what I would do, I think you absolutely need a specialty by specialty approach. Crazy to think that the reduction in training hours for long intense residencies such as neurosurgery and sonething not as long or intense like, say, PM&R have equal impact or applicability. I think you dont do any hour reductions without clear goals (ie is it error reduction or being humane) and without actually looking at the changes to see if your goals will be met (in this case probably not).

But most importantly there has to be some flexibility built into the system to opt out on a case by case basis. If that once in a residency case comes in at the end of my 80 hours, I want the option to stay. If I have an opportunity to bolster my training on something I'm weak in before I leave I want the opportunity to stay, if a guy comes from across the country to give grand rounds on a topic I'm highly interested in, I want the opportunity to stay. The problem is that if the duty hours aren't hard deadlines, the unscrupulous attending at the malignant program is going to bully his residnt into "voluntarily" staying. I think you still are better off screwing over the guy at the malignant program in favor of allowing those who want the better training opportunities -- ie you take the bad with the good. but the ACGME sensitivity is set toward the opposite -- they'd rather screw me to protect that guy - a "this program ruined it for everybody" approach. And therein lies the problem. They never consulted the residents. Many of us liked 30 hour shifts much better than night float. We were less tired over the course of the week, better rested. There aren't even fewer errors after the change so why change it? Many residents want to get close to the same caliber of training as the prior generation so we don't screw up, get sued, seem stupid at our first jobs; we want this a lot more than being home in bed a few hours earlier. Why can't we? Now if the goal is being humane, shouldn't our "wants" factor in? It's mind boggling that the program feels the need to protect me from the training that I want, so that someone else, maybe not even a real (as opposed to hypothetical) resident somewhere, doesn't get screwed by some jerk attending (who again is a hypothetical person). Why not just police that and leave me be?

Sorry for the long post -- it's a subject very close to the heart of all residents later in their training, worrying if we learned enough before we emerge from our residency programs. I hope my points translate to those not in the thick of it.
 
I do, because I'm living it, and have been living it pretty much since I started residency. That being said, I do agree that burnout is at most only a single factor that contributes to people making errors, and also that poor signouts are one of the banes of my existence - even moreso than being sleep deprived and disliking my job.


I have no idea, and at this point, I'm too tired and apathetic to give a flying rip.

Sorry to hear that -- do you think it is a common sentiment in your program/ specialty? Might be person specific, program specific, or specialty specific. And are you, as the above poster suggested, cutting corners on patient care because of it? I've actually never come across what I would define as burnout in residency, particularly early residency where most of the errors occur. We are talking about more than mere transient laziness or apathy in this term I think.
 
Sorry for the long post -- it's a subject very close to the heart of all residents later in their training, worrying if we learned enough before we emerge from our residency programs. I hope my points translate to those not in the thick of it.

No, those were great points and a good discussion. I definitely agree that the ACGME should have gotten input from you guys and at least tried to pilot a few different options. I also agree with the idea that it should be specialty specific. If a surgery resident wants to be able to stay through an especially long case, they should be able to finish it out. I can't imagine anybody not wanting to...

Q, sorry to hear things are still sucky.
 
Sorry to hear that -- do you think it is a common sentiment in your program/ specialty? Might be person specific, program specific, or specialty specific. And are you, as the above poster suggested, cutting corners on patient care because of it? I've actually never come across what I would define as burnout in residency, particularly early residency where most of the errors occur. We are talking about more than mere transient laziness or apathy in this term I think.
Yes, it's common both in my specialty and in my program. No, I don't think I'm cutting corners, although I do have to force myself not to cut corners sometimes. Probably everyone has to do that to some extent though, especially when they're tired.

I think it's more common for interns to be depressed than burned out per se. The evidence I've seen suggests that depression among interns is very common.
 
...

I think it's more common for interns to be depressed than burned out per se. The evidence I've seen suggests that depression among interns is very common.

I'd consider depression a very different animal than burnout. I've not personally seen a ton of either in early residency though.
 
When I don't get enough sleep, I feel like I am drunk. The mind wavers and I cannot focus as intensely and facts become colluded. Sleep is essential. I understand that residents use amphetamines and other assortments of drugs to get through tough times and I probably would resort to caffeine at one point as well.

I remember the doctor who is sporadically featured on CNN in the medical section talking about how he "performed the dreaded head-bob several times" as a resident watching a practicing surgeon during his residency. Here is the article:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/26/health/youn-doctors-fall-asleep

Sure, you *can* work 36 hours straight given proper rest the night before coupled with stimulant drugs but to do it over and over again would put some type of serious strain on the body.

Also, I have heard many stories about how residents are asked to lie that they were moved off shift as agreed and are instead told to complete longer shifts than legally allowed.

I think the major problem, barring any agenda-based research, is the rise of handoffs, from 3 to 9. The more handoffs during the day, the greater the risk of error.
 
Top