Sleep Deprived Doctors

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

Narmerguy

Full Member
Moderator Emeritus
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Messages
6,874
Reaction score
1,357
I know there's too many NYTimes articles floating around here already but i thought this one (quite lengthy) was well written and offers a good historical look at a pretty famous medical case that doesn't get that much coverage on pre-allo. It's definitely worth reading.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/m...deprived-doctors.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=all

Last month something extraordinary happened at teaching hospitals around the country: Young interns worked for 16 hours straight — and then they went home to sleep. After decades of debate and over the opposition of nearly every major medical organization and 79 percent of residency-program directors, new rules went into effect that abolished 30-hour overnight shifts for first-year residents. Sanity, it seemed to people who had long been fighting for a change, had finally won out.

Of course, the overworked, sleep-deprived doctor valiantly saving lives is an archetype that is deeply rooted in the culture of physician training, not to mention television hospital dramas. William Halsted, the first chief of surgery at Johns Hopkins in the 1890s and a founder of modern medical training, required his residents to be on call 362 days a year (only later was it revealed that Halsted fueled his manic work ethic with cocaine), and for the next 100 years the attitude of the medical establishment was more or less the same. Doctors, influenced by their own residency experiences, often see hospital hazing as the most effective way to learn the practice of medicine.

But over the last three decades, a counterpoint archetype has emerged: the sleep-deprived, judgment-impaired young doctor in training who commits a serious medical error. "Doctors think they're a special class and not subject to normal limitations of physiology," says Dr. Christopher Landrigan, an associate professor at Harvard Medical School and one of the most influential voices calling for work-hour reform. A large body of research on the hazards of fatigue ultimately led to the new rule on overnight shifts by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, the independent nonprofit group that regulates medical-residency programs.

More than anything else, it was the death of 18-year-old Libby Zion 27 years ago that served as a catalyst for reform. Zion was jerking uncontrollably and had a fever of 103 degrees when she was admitted to New York Hospital on March 4, 1984. After she was admitted, Zion was given Tylenol and evaluated by a resident and an intern. They prescribed Demerol, a sedative. But her thrashing continued, and the intern on duty, who was just eight months out of medical school, injected another sedative, Haldol, and restrained her to the bed. Shortly after 6 a.m., the teenager's fever shot up to 108 degrees and, despite efforts to cool her, she went into cardiac arrest. Seven hours after she was admitted, Libby Zion was declared dead.

Libby's father was Sidney Zion, a columnist for The Daily News. When Zion learned that his daughter's doctor had by then been on duty for almost 24 hours and that young doctors were routinely awake for more than 36 hours, he sued the hospital and doctors and publicized the conditions he was convinced had led to her death. Stories about overtired interns appeared in major newspapers and on "60 Minutes."

Reforms followed, albeit slowly. In 1989, New York State cut the number of hours that doctors in training could work, setting a limit of 80 hours per week. And in 2003, the accreditation council imposed the 80-hour limit on all U.S. training programs, prohibited trainees from direct patient care after 24 hours of continuous duty and mandated at least one day off per week.

To Landrigan, this was tremendous, if incomplete, progress. He ran a yearlong study during which a team of interns at Brigham and Women's Hospital worked alternate rotations, one on the traditional schedule — a 30-hour shift every third night — and the other on a staggered schedule, during which the longest shift was only 16 hours. The results, published in 2004 in The New England Journal of Medicine, shocked the medical world. Interns working the traditional 30-hour shifts made 36 percent more serious medical errors, including ordering drug overdoses, missing a diagnosis of Lyme disease, trying to drain fluid from the wrong lung and administering drugs known to provoke an allergy. Thomas Nasca, the director of the accreditation council, cites this data as the single strongest argument for limiting doctors' work hours.

But this is where the neat story of the correlation between doctor fatigue and hospital error hits a wall. Landrigan's research was compelling, but his study was small and controlled. In normal, day-to-day practice in hospitals across the country, medical errors didn't fall when work hours were reduced. A massive national study of 14 million veterans and Medicare patients, published in 2009, showed no major improvement in safety after the 2003 reforms. The researchers parsed the data to see whether even a subset of hospitals improved, but the disappointing results appeared in hospitals of all sizes and all levels of academic rigor. "The fact that the policy appeared to have no impact on safety is disappointing," says David Bates, a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health and a national authority on medical errors.

CLICK LINK TO READ MORE

Members don't see this ad.
 
:thumbup: Thanks for the article. It was an interesting read.
 
Very interesting. Thanks for posting!
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Psh, back when I was a young whipper-snapper we used to do 50 hour shifts and celebrate by buying a big breakfast with a whole straw-penny.

Darn, I was looking forward to waking up in the middle of the night to do surgical call. This makes me a sad panda.
 
work hour limits are not effective currently and most likely can never be enforced, unless there are people hired to watch every department at every hospital
 
The new work hour restrictions turns our surgery interns into fifth year medical students. The amount of experience they're losing out on is incredible. I'm not jealous at all that I just missed that cut-off (I'm a PGY2). However, I'm not real fond of the fact that I get to pick up all their extra call...
 
The new work hour restrictions turns our surgery interns into fifth year medical students. The amount of experience they're losing out on is incredible. I'm not jealous at all that I just missed that cut-off (I'm a PGY2). However, I'm not real fond of the fact that I get to pick up all their extra call...

Most surgical residents echo this feeling and i agree. The less hours=less experience=longer residency/or less training
 
I wonder how much of the failed improvement lies in the fact that almost nobody actually adhere's to the 80 hour restriction. That would make sense. Nobody follows the rules and thus there's no appreciable change...
 
I wonder how much of the failed improvement lies in the fact that almost nobody actually adhere's to the 80 hour restriction. That would make sense. Nobody follows the rules and thus there's no appreciable change...

I'm sure hospital employees would jump down the throats of any residents who may be tempted to report failed adherence to the 80 hour restrictions. Not a good situation.
 
88.
Dorothy
Chelsea, NYC
August 7th, 2011
11:41 am
All those doctors who believe that a doctor who's been up, without sleep, for 36 hours is able to make sound decisions should immediately be put on a plane to someplace at least 12 hours away with a pilot who's been up, without sleep, for 24 hours.
Recommend Recommended by 4 Readers
 
Most surgical residents echo this feeling and i agree. The less hours=less experience=longer residency/or less training


I think its more of a give and take situation. There are advantages as well as disadvantages to any situation in life. Sure, you could argue that all those extra hours do provide needed and necessary experience but how valuable is this experience when one is sleep deprived? In other words, can a resident really learn and register w/ so little sleep? It may be much more efficient to allow more sleep (time off) and restrict the hours b/c doing so may allow for better efficiency.

Kind of like the concept of studying smarter, not harder.
 
The new work hour restrictions turns our surgery interns into fifth year medical students. The amount of experience they're losing out on is incredible. I'm not jealous at all that I just missed that cut-off (I'm a PGY2). However, I'm not real fond of the fact that I get to pick up all their extra call...

Do you think that the added hand-offs of patients between doctors is a problem?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
88.
Dorothy
Chelsea, NYC
August 7th, 2011
11:41 am
All those doctors who believe that a doctor who's been up, without sleep, for 36 hours is able to make sound decisions should immediately be put on a plane to someplace at least 12 hours away with a pilot who's been up, without sleep, for 24 hours.
Recommend Recommended by 4 Readers

this :laugh:
 
Most surgical residents echo this feeling and i agree. The less hours=less experience=longer residency/or less training
It's not just the fewer total hours, it's the fact that things happen at night that just don't happen during the day.

I wonder how much of the failed improvement lies in the fact that almost nobody actually adhere's to the 80 hour restriction. That would make sense. Nobody follows the rules and thus there's no appreciable change...
Many specialties easily adhere to the 80 hour week. Just a little harder in the ones that involve surgery...

I think its more of a give and take situation. There are advantages as well as disadvantages to any situation in life. Sure, you could argue that all those extra hours do provide needed and necessary experience but how valuable is this experience when one is sleep deprived? In other words, can a resident really learn and register w/ so little sleep? It may be much more efficient to allow more sleep (time off) and restrict the hours b/c doing so may allow for better efficiency.

Kind of like the concept of studying smarter, not harder.
Most stuff on call happens before 2am. The hours between 3a-5a are usually pretty darn quiet. You can sleep then. If you've been up since 5am and you're exhausted to the point of sleep deprivation and mental errors by 10-11pm, then I'd suggest that at the very least, surgery isn't for you, and maybe medicine in general isn't for you. Most of the time, most of the interesting stuff happens before midnight or 1am.

Do you think that the added hand-offs of patients between doctors is a problem?
Not really. In our system, we don't have that many hand-offs. If anything, our attendings do a lot more hand-offs than we do. On any given night, either the junior or senior resident (or both) is usually familiar with any given patient because we've been caring for them since admission. During weeknights, our attendings often don't sign out to each other at all.
 
88.
Dorothy
Chelsea, NYC
August 7th, 2011
11:41 am
All those doctors who believe that a doctor who's been up, without sleep, for 36 hours is able to make sound decisions should immediately be put on a plane to someplace at least 12 hours away with a pilot who's been up, without sleep, for 24 hours.
Recommend Recommended by 4 Readers
It hasn't been 36 hours for 8 years, and it's 28 hours now.

Secondly, except for on weekends (when attendings take two nights in a row, as is often the case), the attending hasn't been awake for even 24 hours before they switch off who's on call. Sometimes a case that came in overnight won't start until later in the day though.

Third, the alternative to a surgeon who's been up all night isn't a well-rested surgeon. Your alternative would be no surgeon. If I were standing on top of a building with rising floodwaters, and my alternative was a Coast Guard helicopter pilot picking me up after being awake for 24 hours or no pilot at all, I'd pick the sleep-deprived one.

We don't have enough surgeons in the country to have a well-rested one available at 2am at all times. Sorry.
 
Third, the alternative to a surgeon who's been up all night isn't a well-rested surgeon. Your alternative would be no surgeon. If I were standing on top of a building with rising floodwaters, and my alternative was a Coast Guard helicopter pilot picking me up after being awake for 24 hours or no pilot at all, I'd pick the sleep-deprived one.

This has been said to Residents from every specialty since way back when they had no work hour limits at all: "if you don't work without sleep, for less than minimum wage, no one else could possibly take your place and people will die". The hospital then generally goes on to explain how the law precludes them from hiring residents, and that more board certified physicians just aren't in the budget (because the residents 'cost' so much), so if the residents don't work around the clock the work just won't get done at all, people will die, and the blood of those patients will be on the Residents' hands. Don't believe it for a second.

I thought the most important part of the linked article was this:

Some researchers are trying small-scale innovative designs. Johns Hopkins Medical School, for example, hired professional "hospitalists" to work full time in the inpatient wards. This freed up trainees to concentrate on a smaller number of patients. Though they work fewer hours, trainees now spend more time with patients, make house calls after people are discharged and learn outpatient care for chronic problems. David Hellmann, who created the program, says the model cut heart failure readmissions by two-thirds, which offset the costs of the additional staff members.

You mean that, when deprived of resident slave labor, the hospital boards can just tranfer a small amount of the money they normally pour into their own pay and benifits packages and just hire enough physicians to do the work? That when they swore than there wasn't a dime to spare in the budget and that residents were a huge expense that they were, in fact, lying? That there are not appendices exploded like handgrenades for lack of surgeons? No DKAs dying in the ER because no one works nights in the ICU? No strokes going without tpA because there's not a single neurologist willing to work a night shift? Who woulda thunk?
 
This has been said to Residents from every specialty since way back when they had no work hour limits at all: "if you don't work without sleep, for less than minimum wage, no one else could possibly take your place and people will die". The hospital then generally goes on to explain how the law precludes them from hiring residents, and that more board certified physicians just aren't in the budget (because the residents 'cost' so much), so if the residents don't work around the clock the work just won't get done at all, people will die, and the blood of those patients will be on the Residents' hands. Don't believe it for a second.

I thought the most important part of the linked article was this:



You mean that, when deprived of resident slave labor, the hospital boards can just tranfer a small amount of the money they normally pour into their own pay and benifits packages and just hire enough physicians to do the work? That when they swore than there wasn't a dime to spare in the budget and that residents were a huge expense that they were, in fact, lying? That there are not appendices exploded like handgrenades for lack of surgeons? No DKAs dying in the ER because no one works nights in the ICU? No strokes going without tpA because there's not a single neurologist willing to work a night shift? Who woulda thunk?

WORD. :thumbup:
 
This has been said to Residents from every specialty since way back when they had no work hour limits at all: "if you don't work without sleep, for less than minimum wage, no one else could possibly take your place and people will die". The hospital then generally goes on to explain how the law precludes them from hiring residents, and that more board certified physicians just aren't in the budget (because the residents 'cost' so much), so if the residents don't work around the clock the work just won't get done at all, people will die, and the blood of those patients will be on the Residents' hands. Don't believe it for a second.
I didn't say residents, now did I? I'm talking staff surgeons.

Third, the alternative to a surgeon who's been up all night isn't a well-rested surgeon. Your alternative would be no surgeon. If I were standing on top of a building with rising floodwaters, and my alternative was a Coast Guard helicopter pilot picking me up after being awake for 24 hours or no pilot at all, I'd pick the sleep-deprived one.

We don't have enough surgeons in the country to have a well-rested one available at 2am at all times. Sorry.
Not a peep about residents.
 
We don't have enough surgeons in the country to have a well-rested one available at 2am at all times. Sorry.

I mean, that's really the bottom line, isn't it? People want to decrease work hours, allow more time for physician-patient interaction and physician-physician coordination, and upgrade everything to EMR. Well, all of that costs money, and if we're blowing hundreds of billions of dollars a year on {defense contractors, tax cuts to the rich, Medicare, insurance company profits, pick whatever you hate most}, then you're going to have a problem, no matter how much blood you try to squeeze out of the stone.

Wikipedia tells me that total GME spending is about $8.4 billion. Let's be generous and round that up to $10 billion. That pays for 24,000 new residents a year, give or take a few thousand. Let's say you manage to increase that figure by 33%. Assuming that each hospital simply gains an additional resident for every three that they already have, does it not also logically follow that residency work hours could be cut by 25%? Or at least even 15%?
 
Medical errors is an important measure, but so might be patient satisfaction.

Physicians who haven't been awake for 30 hours are going to be more congenial, which should make for a better experience for the patients.
 
We don't have enough surgeons in the country to have a well-rested one available at 2am at all times. Sorry.

This surprises me. I'm not sure why. I was under the (possibly mistaken) impression that surgery was one of the more popular specialties? With a few life style modifications, would it not follow that it would be an even more popular line of work with rising med students?
 
Medical errors is an important measure, but so might be patient satisfaction.

Physicians who haven't been awake for 30 hours are going to be more congenial, which should make for a better experience for the patients.

While that might be true, I don't think increased congeniality can be a reason for legislation.
 
While that might be true, I don't think increased congeniality can be a reason for legislation.
I think there have been lesser reasons in the past.


I think that working 6-16 hour shifts is more palatable than 3-30's to me. I know for a fact that I would do a better job with the former rather than the latter.
 
This surprises me. I'm not sure why. I was under the (possibly mistaken) impression that surgery was one of the more popular specialties? With a few life style modifications, would it not follow that it would be an even more popular line of work with rising med students?


I was informed by the cardiothoracic surgeon I shadow that his field is declining rapidly. According to him, more than half of those surgeons are over the age of 60 (i think this was the correct age), and half of the cardiothoracic surgery training programs in the country have shut down.
 
I was informed by the cardiothoracic surgeon I shadow that his field is declining rapidly. According to him, more than half of those surgeons are over the age of 60 (i think this was the correct age), and half of the cardiothoracic surgery training programs in the country have shut down.

Gee whiz, really?! Those are some shocking stats, if it is the case. Grey's Anatomy makes it look so cool.

Kidding aside, did he mention why?
 
This surprises me. I'm not sure why. I was under the (possibly mistaken) impression that surgery was one of the more popular specialties? With a few life style modifications, would it not follow that it would be an even more popular line of work with rising med students?
There haven't been - and won't be - any lifestyle modifications to most attending surgeons' lifestyles. It's one of the least lifestyle friendly specialties and very likely to remain that way.

Besides, just because something is popular doesn't mean that there's an abundance of them. Derm is the most popular specialty, and there's a shortage of dermatologists because they restrict the supply.
 
Medical errors is an important measure, but so might be patient satisfaction.

Physicians who haven't been awake for 30 hours are going to be more congenial, which should make for a better experience for the patients.
While this is technically true, I think it's really misleading.

IMO, medical accuracy trumps such subjective variables as "patient satisfaction" without negotiation.

Would you rather have patients happier or patients receive higher quality treatment?
 
I didn't say residents, now did I? I'm talking staff surgeons.

The only attending surgeons I've ever met that worked more than 16 hours in anything approaching a normal day, or much over 60 in a week, were transplant surgeons in an academic envrionment and brand new surgeons trying to make partner in their practice. The standard private practice model I've seen is 8-12 hours/day, 5 days/week with some insane call/weekend sharing system spread out across a large group so that the majority of the year no one is getting called in to work when they're not planning on being their. In terms of exhausted attendings routinely operating at 2 a.m., I think you might be over generalizing something a few academic surgeons do in your particular program.
 
This surprises me. I'm not sure why. I was under the (possibly mistaken) impression that surgery was one of the more popular specialties? With a few life style modifications, would it not follow that it would be an even more popular line of work with rising med students?

There is restricted supply due to the bottleneck that occurs after undergraduate medical education: limited residency positions, that have not increased as the government has not allocated more funds through Medicare for graduate medical education, despite opening more schools and increasing enrollment, all while we now approach an era of government austerity.

I was informed by the cardiothoracic surgeon I shadow that his field is declining rapidly. According to him, more than half of those surgeons are over the age of 60 (i think this was the correct age), and half of the cardiothoracic surgery training programs in the country have shut down.

CT is a dying field, due to the rise of other specialties and/or expanded scope of existing specialties. Also, IIRC, from the department head I spoke with once, changes in billing also affected it over the years.
 
The only attending surgeons I've ever met that worked more than 16 hours in anything approaching a normal day, or much over 60 in a week, were transplant surgeons in an academic envrionment and brand new surgeons trying to make partner in their practice. The standard private practice model I've seen is 8-12 hours/day, 5 days/week with some insane call/weekend sharing system spread out across a large group so that the majority of the year no one is getting called in to work when they're not planning on being their. In terms of exhausted attendings routinely operating at 2 a.m., I think you might be over generalizing something a few academic surgeons do in your particular program.
Ugh, I didn't say anyone "routinely operates" at 2am, but if you ever need an operation at 2am, you are very likely going to get someone who hasn't gotten more than 1-2 hours of sleep prior to the operation. Lots of regular trauma/critical care jobs work in 24 hour shifts as well.
 
Ugh, I didn't say anyone "routinely operates" at 2am, but if you ever need an operation at 2am, you are very likely going to get someone who hasn't gotten more than 1-2 hours of sleep prior to the operation. Lots of regular trauma/critical care jobs work in 24 hour shifts as well.


Again, I haven't seen thi. I have never seen 24 hour shifts, and the only surgeons I know who took home call for 2 am emergencies were the ones who expected to almost never come in (urologists, etc)
 
Again, I haven't seen thi. I have never seen 24 hour shifts, and the only surgeons I know who took home call for 2 am emergencies were the ones who expected to almost never come in (urologists, etc)

So who does the appendectomies in your community? Dedicated acute care surgeons working 12 hour shifts only?

And how many job postings have you looked at for trauma positions?
 
Top