- Joined
- May 9, 2007
- Messages
- 369
- Reaction score
- 2
I don't know if this has been posted already, my cursory search said no:
http://www.slate.com/id/2206367/
http://www.slate.com/id/2206367/
It's definitely a testimony to the wasted time/inefficiency of the system.They mention that ortho residents who have half the time they did in the "traditional" structure didn't know how to tie sutures and such. Isn't this actually an indictment of the current system? Why do surgeons the first half of their time in the OR observing, and only then begin to learn to do it for themselves?
It's definitely a testimony to the wasted time/inefficiency of the system.
It's definitely a testimony to the wasted time/inefficiency of the system.
I've always wondered whether it's the most effective and efficient way to train doctors. Sometimes the rationale for the current system can appear to be the maintenance of a cheap source of labor for hospitals.
there's no need to make residencies longer.. make residency hours better spent.The thing that caught me most about this article was that a popular argument from the people on the "con" side was "if we cut the hours, doctors won't be as well trained."
Well, this has an obvious fix; make residencies longer. If you're doing X years at 80 hours a week, then you could do X+1 at 60. But somehow I don't see that happening anytime soon...people do a lot of chomping at the bit already.
Here's something everyone needs to know: the residency system originated out of an educational philosophy that to become a competent doctor, you needed to see patients through the entire course of their illness from start to finish. That's why residents used to actually live in the hospital (that's why they're called residents). The idea was that you'd care for and treat a patient, uninterrupted, from their intial presentation with a cough and diagnosis of pneumonia, through their discharge, and that only by doing so repeatedly did you have the kind of knowledge and experience that makes one a doctor.
Obviously, even the switch from living in the hospital to every-other-night call represents a major step away from this educational philosophy, but the latter still provides a lot more exposure than a system that requires you to go home after 30 hours.
You can agree or disagree with the educational philosophy, and yes, things are different from the olden days when you typically got more sleep while on call, but it was never about cheap labor or, as cuturally left-wing medical students who hate everything old, white, and male like to think, hazing.
They mention that ortho residents who have half the time they did in the "traditional" structure didn't know how to tie sutures and such. Isn't this actually an indictment of the current system? Why do surgeons the first half of their time in the OR observing, and only then begin to learn to do it for themselves?
I could have done w/o the political potshot. You don't have to have a political orientation to wonder and question about whether things are done effectively, efficiently, or to wonder about the rationale for certain ways of doing things.