PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-25 (1075253)

Clipboard (0)
None

Related Articles

1.  Implementing the 2009 Institute of Medicine recommendations on resident physician work hours, supervision, and safety 
Long working hours and sleep deprivation have been a facet of physician training in the US since the advent of the modern residency system. However, the scientific evidence linking fatigue with deficits in human performance, accidents and errors in industries from aeronautics to medicine, nuclear power, and transportation has mounted over the last 40 years. This evidence has also spawned regulations to help ensure public safety across safety-sensitive industries, with the notable exception of medicine.
In late 2007, at the behest of the US Congress, the Institute of Medicine embarked on a year-long examination of the scientific evidence linking resident physician sleep deprivation with clinical performance deficits and medical errors. The Institute of Medicine’s report, entitled “Resident duty hours: Enhancing sleep, supervision and safety”, published in January 2009, recommended new limits on resident physician work hours and workload, increased supervision, a heightened focus on resident physician safety, training in structured handovers and quality improvement, more rigorous external oversight of work hours and other aspects of residency training, and the identification of expanded funding sources necessary to implement the recommended reforms successfully and protect the public and resident physicians themselves from preventable harm.
Given that resident physicians comprise almost a quarter of all physicians who work in hospitals, and that taxpayers, through Medicare and Medicaid, fund graduate medical education, the public has a deep investment in physician training. Patients expect to receive safe, high-quality care in the nation’s teaching hospitals. Because it is their safety that is at issue, their voices should be central in policy decisions affecting patient safety. It is likewise important to integrate the perspectives of resident physicians, policy makers, and other constituencies in designing new policies. However, since its release, discussion of the Institute of Medicine report has been largely confined to the medical education community, led by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME).
To begin gathering these perspectives and developing a plan to implement safer work hours for resident physicians, a conference entitled “Enhancing sleep, supervision and safety: What will it take to implement the Institute of Medicine recommendations?” was held at Harvard Medical School on June 17–18, 2010. This White Paper is a product of a diverse group of 26 representative stakeholders bringing relevant new information and innovative practices to bear on a critical patient safety problem. Given that our conference included experts from across disciplines with diverse perspectives and interests, not every recommendation was endorsed by each invited conference participant. However, every recommendation made here was endorsed by the majority of the group, and many were endorsed unanimously. Conference members participated in the process, reviewed the final product, and provided input before publication. Participants provided their individual perspectives, which do not necessarily represent the formal views of any organization.
In September 2010 the ACGME issued new rules to go into effect on July 1, 2011. Unfortunately, they stop considerably short of the Institute of Medicine’s recommendations and those endorsed by this conference. In particular, the ACGME only applied the limitation of 16 hours to first-year resident physicans. Thus, it is clear that policymakers, hospital administrators, and residency program directors who wish to implement safer health care systems must go far beyond what the ACGME will require. We hope this White Paper will serve as a guide and provide encouragement for that effort.
Resident physician workload and supervision
By the end of training, a resident physician should be able to practice independently. Yet much of resident physicians’ time is dominated by tasks with little educational value. The caseload can be so great that inadequate reflective time is left for learning based on clinical experiences. In addition, supervision is often vaguely defined and discontinuous. Medical malpractice data indicate that resident physicians are frequently named in lawsuits, most often for lack of supervision. The recommendations are: The ACGME should adjust resident physicians workload requirements to optimize educational value. Resident physicians as well as faculty should be involved in work redesign that eliminates nonessential and noneducational activity from resident physician dutiesMechanisms should be developed for identifying in real time when a resident physician’s workload is excessive, and processes developed to activate additional providersTeamwork should be actively encouraged in delivery of patient care. Historically, much of medical training has focused on individual knowledge, skills, and responsibility. As health care delivery has become more complex, it will be essential to train resident and attending physicians in effective teamwork that emphasizes collective responsibility for patient care and recognizes the signs, both individual and systemic, of a schedule and working conditions that are too demanding to be safeHospitals should embrace the opportunities that resident physician training redesign offers. Hospitals should recognize and act on the potential benefits of work redesign, eg, increased efficiency, reduced costs, improved quality of care, and resident physician and attending job satisfactionAttending physicians should supervise all hospital admissions. Resident physicians should directly discuss all admissions with attending physicians. Attending physicians should be both cognizant of and have input into the care patients are to receive upon admission to the hospitalInhouse supervision should be required for all critical care services, including emergency rooms, intensive care units, and trauma services. Resident physicians should not be left unsupervised to care for critically ill patients. In settings in which the acuity is high, physicians who have completed residency should provide direct supervision for resident physicians. Supervising physicians should always be physically in the hospital for supervision of resident physicians who care for critically ill patientsThe ACGME should explicitly define “good” supervision by specialty and by year of training. Explicit requirements for intensity and level of training for supervision of specific clinical scenarios should be providedCenters for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) should use graduate medical education funding to provide incentives to programs with proven, effective levels of supervision. Although this action would require federal legislation, reimbursement rules would help to ensure that hospitals pay attention to the importance of good supervision and require it from their training programs
Resident physician work hours
Although the IOM “Sleep, supervision and safety” report provides a comprehensive review and discussion of all aspects of graduate medical education training, the report’s focal point is its recommendations regarding the hours that resident physicians are currently required to work. A considerable body of scientific evidence, much of it cited by the Institute of Medicine report, describes deteriorating performance in fatigued humans, as well as specific studies on resident physician fatigue and preventable medical errors.
The question before this conference was what work redesign and cultural changes are needed to reform work hours as recommended by the Institute of Medicine’s evidence-based report? Extensive scientific data demonstrate that shifts exceeding 12–16 hours without sleep are unsafe. Several principles should be followed in efforts to reduce consecutive hours below this level and achieve safer work schedules. The recommendations are: Limit resident physician work hours to 12–16 hour maximum shiftsA minimum of 10 hours off duty should be scheduled between shiftsResident physician input into work redesign should be actively solicitedSchedules should be designed that adhere to principles of sleep and circadian science; this includes careful consideration of the effects of multiple consecutive night shifts, and provision of adequate time off after night work, as specified in the IOM reportResident physicians should not be scheduled up to the maximum permissible limits; emergencies frequently occur that require resident physicians to stay longer than their scheduled shifts, and this should be anticipated in scheduling resident physicians’ work shiftsHospitals should anticipate the need for iterative improvement as new schedules are initiated; be prepared to learn from the initial phase-in, and change the plan as neededAs resident physician work hours are redesigned, attending physicians should also be considered; a potential consequence of resident physician work hour reduction and increased supervisory requirements may be an increase in work for attending physicians; this should be carefully monitored, and adjustments to attending physician work schedules made as needed to prevent unsafe work hours or working conditions for this group“Home call” should be brought under the overall limits of working hours; work load and hours should be monitored in each residency program to ensure that resident physicians and fellows on home call are getting sufficient sleepMedicare funding for graduate medical education in each hospital should be linked with adherence to the Institute of Medicine limits on resident physician work hours
Moonlighting by resident physicians
The Institute of Medicine report recommended including external as well as internal moonlighting in working hour limits. The recommendation is: All moonlighting work hours should be included in the ACGME working hour limits and actively monitored. Hospitals should formalize a moonlighting policy and establish systems for actively monitoring resident physician moonlighting
Safety of resident physicians
The “Sleep, supervision and safety” report also addresses fatigue-related harm done to resident physicians themselves. The report focuses on two main sources of physical injury to resident physicians impaired by fatigue, ie, needle-stick exposure to blood-borne pathogens and motor vehicle crashes. Providing safe transportation home for resident physicians is a logistical and financial challenge for hospitals. Educating physicians at all levels on the dangers of fatigue is clearly required to change driving behavior so that safe hospital-funded transport home is used effectively. Fatigue-related injury prevention (including not driving while drowsy) should be taught in medical school and during residency, and reinforced with attending physicians; hospitals and residency programs must be informed that resident physicians’ ability to judge their own level of impairment is impaired when they are sleep deprived; hence, leaving decisions about the capacity to drive to impaired resident physicians is not recommendedHospitals should provide transportation to all resident physicians who report feeling too tired to drive safely; in addition, although consecutive work should not exceed 16 hours, hospitals should provide transportation for all resident physicians who, because of unforeseen reasons or emergencies, work for longer than consecutive 24 hours; transportation under these circumstances should be automatically provided to house staff, and should not rely on self-identification or request
Training in effective handovers and quality improvement
Handover practice for resident physicians, attendings, and other health care providers has long been identified as a weak link in patient safety throughout health care settings. Policies to improve handovers of care must be tailored to fit the appropriate clinical scenario, recognizing that information overload can also be a problem. At the heart of improving handovers is the organizational effort to improve quality, an effort in which resident physicians have typically been insufficiently engaged. The recommendations are: Hospitals should train attending and resident physicians in effective handovers of careHospitals should create uniform processes for handovers that are tailored to meet each clinical setting; all handovers should be done verbally and face-to-face, but should also utilize written toolsWhen possible, hospitals should integrate hand-over tools into their electronic medical records (EMR) systems; these systems should be standardized to the extent possible across residency programs in a hospital, but may be tailored to the needs of specific programs and services; federal government should help subsidize adoption of electronic medical records by hospitals to improve signoutWhen feasible, handovers should be a team effort including nurses, patients, and familiesHospitals should include residents in their quality improvement and patient safety efforts; the ACGME should specify in their core competency requirements that resident physicians work on quality improvement projects; likewise, the Joint Commission should require that resident physicians be included in quality improvement and patient safety programs at teaching hospitals; hospital administrators and residency program directors should create opportunities for resident physicians to become involved in ongoing quality improvement projects and root cause analysis teams; feedback on successful quality improvement interventions should be shared with resident physicians and broadly disseminatedQuality improvement/patient safety concepts should be integral to the medical school curriculum; medical school deans should elevate the topics of patient safety, quality improvement, and teamwork; these concepts should be integrated throughout the medical school curriculum and reinforced throughout residency; mastery of these concepts by medical students should be tested on the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) stepsFederal government should support involvement of resident physicians in quality improvement efforts; initiatives to improve quality by including resident physicians in quality improvement projects should be financially supported by the Department of Health and Human Services
Monitoring and oversight of the ACGME
While the ACGME is a key stakeholder in residency training, external voices are essential to ensure that public interests are heard in the development and monitoring of standards. Consequently, the Institute of Medicine report recommended external oversight and monitoring through the Joint Commission and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). The recommendations are: Make comprehensive fatigue management a Joint Commission National Patient Safety Goal; fatigue is a safety concern not only for resident physicians, but also for nurses, attending physicians, and other health care workers; the Joint Commission should seek to ensure that all health care workers, not just resident physicians, are working as safely as possibleFederal government, including the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, should encourage development of comprehensive fatigue management programs which all health systems would eventually be required to implementMake ACGME compliance with working hours a “ condition of participation” for reimbursement of direct and indirect graduate medical education costs; financial incentives will greatly increase the adoption of and compliance with ACGME standards
Future financial support for implementation
The Institute of Medicine’s report estimates that $1.7 billion (in 2008 dollars) would be needed to implement its recommendations. Twenty-five percent of that amount ($376 million) will be required just to bring hospitals into compliance with the existing 2003 ACGME rules. Downstream savings to the health care system could potentially result from safer care, but these benefits typically do not accrue to hospitals and residency programs, who have been asked historically to bear the burden of residency reform costs. The recommendations are: The Institute of Medicine should convene a panel of stakeholders, including private and public funders of health care and graduate medical education, to lay down the concrete steps necessary to identify and allocate the resources needed to implement the recommendations contained in the IOM “Resident duty hours: Enhancing sleep, supervision and safety” report. Conference participants suggested several approaches to engage public and private support for this initiativeEfforts to find additional funding to implement the Institute of Medicine recommendations should focus more broadly on patient safety and health care delivery reform; policy efforts focused narrowly upon resident physician work hours are less likely to succeed than broad patient safety initiatives that include residency redesign as a key componentHospitals should view the Institute of Medicine recommendations as an opportunity to begin resident physician work redesign projects as the core of a business model that embraces safety and ultimately saves resourcesBoth the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Director of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services should take the Institute of Medicine recommendations into consideration when promulgating rules for innovation grantsThe National Health Care Workforce Commission should consider the Institute of Medicine recommendations when analyzing the nation’s physician workforce needs
Recommendations for future research
Conference participants concurred that convening the stakeholders and agreeing on a research agenda was key. Some observed that some sectors within the medical education community have been reluctant to act on the data. Several logical funders for future research were identified. But above all agencies, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is the only stakeholder that funds graduate medical education upstream and will reap savings downstream if preventable medical errors are reduced as a result of reform of resident physician work hours.
doi:10.2147/NSS.S19649
PMCID: PMC3630963  PMID: 23616719
resident; hospital; working hours; safety
2.  To Leave or to Lie? Are Concerns about a Shift-Work Mentality and Eroding Professionalism as a result of Duty Hour Rules Justified? 
The Milbank Quarterly  2010;88(3):350-381.
Context
Among medical educators, there are concerns that the 2003 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) duty hour rules (DHR) has encouraged the development of a “shift work” mentality among residents while eroding professionalism by forcing residents to either abandon patients when they hit 80 hours or lie about hours worked. In this qualitative study, we explore how medical and surgical residents perceive and respond to DHR by examining the ‘local’ organizational culture in which their work is embedded.
Methods
In 2008, we conducted three months of ethnographic observation of internal medicine and general surgery residents as they went about their everyday work in two hospitals affiliated with the same training program. We also conducted in-depth interviews with seventeen residents. Field notes and interview transcripts were analyzed for perceptions and behaviors surrounding coming and leaving work, reporting of duty hours, and resident opinion about DHR.
Findings
Our respondents did not exhibit a “shift work” mentality in relation to their work. We found that residents: 1) occasionally stay in the hospital in order to complete patient care tasks even when, according to the clock, they were required to leave because the organizational culture stressed performing work thoroughly, 2) do not blindly embrace noncompliance with DHR but are thoughtful about the tradeoffs inherent in the regulations, and 3) express nuanced and complex reasons for erroneously reporting duty hours that suggest that reporting hours worked is not a simple issue of lying or truth telling.
Conclusions
Concerns about DHR and the erosion of resident professionalism via the development of a “shift work” mentality are likely to have been over-stated. At the institution we examined, residents did not behave as automatons punching in and out at prescribed times. Rather, they are mindful of the consequences and meaning surrounding the decisions they make to stay or leave work. When work hour rules are broken, residents do not perceive this behavior to be deviant but rather as a reflection of the higher priority that they place on providing patient care than on complying strictly with DHR. The influence of DHR on professionalism is more complex than conventional wisdom suggests and requires additional assessment.
doi:10.1111/j.1468-0009.2010.00603.x
PMCID: PMC3000931  PMID: 20860575
internship and residency; duty hour regulations; professionalism
3.  Effects of the 2011 Duty Hour Reforms on Interns and Their Patients: A Prospective Longitudinal Cohort Study 
JAMA internal medicine  2013;173(8):657-663.
Background
In 2003, the first phase of duty hour requirements for U.S. residency programs recommended by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) was implemented. Evidence suggests that this first phase of duty hour requirements resulted in a modest improvement in resident wellbeing and patient safety. To build on these initial changes, the ACGME recommended a new set of duty hour requirements that took effect in July 2011. We sought to determine the effects of the 2011 duty hour reforms on first year residents (interns) and their patients.
Methods
We conducted alongitudinal cohort study of 2323 interns entering one of 51 residency programs at 14 university and community-based GME institutions or graduating from one of four medical schools participating in the study. We compared self-reported duty hours, hours of sleep, depressive symptoms, well-being and medical errors at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months of the internship year between interns serving before (2009 and 2010) and interns serving after (2011) the implementation of the new duty-hour requirements.
Results
58% of invited interns chose to participate in the study. Reported duty hours decreased from an average of 67.0 hours/week before the new rules to 64.3 hours/week after the new rules were instituted (p<0.001). Despite the decrease in duty hours, there were no significant changes in hours slept (7.0→6.8; p=0.17), depressive symptoms (5.8→5.7; p=NS) or well-being (48.5→48.4; p=0.86) reported by interns. With the new duty hour rules, the percentage of interns who reported committing a serious medical error increased from 19.9% to 23.3% (p=0.007).
Conclusions
Although interns report working fewer hours under the new duty hour restrictions, this decrease has not been accompanied by an increase in hours of sleep or an improvement in depressive symptoms or wellbeing but has been accompanied by an unanticipated increase in self-reported medical errors under the new duty hour restrictions.
doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.351
PMCID: PMC4016974  PMID: 23529201
Graduate; Medical; Education; Residency; Work; Hours; Sleep
4.  Redesign of an Internal Medicine Ward Rotation: Operational Challenges and Outcomes 
Introduction
In anticipation of the 2011 ACGME duty hour requirements, we redesigned our internal medicine resident ward experience. Our previous ward structure included a maximum 30-hour duty period for postgraduate year-1 (PGY-1) residents. In the redesigned ward structure, PGY-1 residents had a maximum 18-hour duty period.
Methods
We evaluated resident conference attendance and duty hour violations before and after implementation of our new ward redesign. We administered a satisfaction survey to residents and faculty 6 months after implementation of the new ward redesign.
Results
Before implementation of the ward redesign, 30-hour continuous and 80-h/wk duty violations were each 2/year, and violations of the 10-hour rest between duty periods were 10/year for 74 residents. After implementation of the ward redesign, there were no 30-hour continuous or 80-h/wk duty violations, but violations of the 10-hour rest between duty periods more than doubled (26/year for 75 residents). Duty hours were reported by different mechanisms for the 2 periods. Conference attendance improved. Resident versus faculty satisfaction scores were similar. Both groups judged overall professional satisfaction as slightly worse after implementation.
Conclusion
Our ward rotation redesign eliminated 30-hour continuous and 80-h/wk duty violations as well as improved conference attendance. These benefits occurred at the cost of more faculty hires, decreased resident elective time, and slightly worse postimplementation satisfaction scores.
doi:10.4300/JGME-D-11-00092.1
PMCID: PMC3312544  PMID: 23451316
5.  The Impact of ACGME Work-Hour Reforms on the Operative Experience of Fellows in Surgical Subspecialty Programs 
Background
In July 2003, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) introduced a set of regulations that mandated a reduction in the number of hours that medical residents can work. These requirements have generated controversy among medical educators, with some expressing concern that reducing resident hours may limit clinical exposure and competency, particularly in surgical specialties.
Objective
This study examines the impact of duty hour restrictions on resident operative experience in residents in 2 surgical subspecialties since the implementation of the ACGME duty hour limits.
Method
We examined operative log data for vascular surgery and pediatric surgery, using the academic year immediately preceding the duty hour restrictions, 2002 to 2003, as a baseline for comparison to subsequent academic years through 2006 to 2007 for vascular surgery and 2007 to 2008 for pediatric surgery.
Results
Graduating fellows in pediatric surgery showed no change in their total operative volume following duty hour restrictions. The pediatric-defined category of neonate procedures showed an increase following duty hour restrictions. Graduating fellows in vascular surgery showed an increase in total major procedures as surgeon. The vascular-defined categories of endovascular-diagnostic, endovascular-therapeutic, and endovascular-graft procedures also increased.
Conclusions
The reduction of duty hours has not resulted in a decrease in operative volume as some have predicted. Operative volume in pediatric surgery remained mainly unchanged, whereas operative volume in vascular surgery increased. We explore possible explanations for the observed findings.
doi:10.4300/JGME-D-10-00174.1
PMCID: PMC3186271  PMID: 22379533
6.  Failure to Thrive: Pediatric Residents Weigh In on Feasibility Trial of the Proposed 2008 Institute of Medicine Work Hour Restrictions 
Background
In December 2008 the Institute of Medicine (IOM) released a report recommending limits on resident hours that are considerably more restrictive than the current Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education duty hour standards.
Intervention
In March 2009, a large pediatric residency program implemented a 1-month trial of a schedule and team structure fully congruent with the IOM recommendations to study the implications of such a schedule.
Methods
Comparison of the interns' experience in the trialed intervention schedule was made to interns working a traditional schedule with every fourth night call.
Results
The residents on the intervention schedule averaged 7.8 hours of sleep per 24-hour period compared to 7.6 hours for interns in a traditional schedule. Participation in bedside rounds and formal didactic conferences was decreased in the intervention schedule. Several factors contributed to increased perceived work intensity for interns in the intervention schedule. Redistribution of work during busy shifts altered the role of senior residents and attending physicians which may have a negative effect on senior residents' ability to develop skills as supervisors and educators.
Conclusions
The trial implementation suggests it is possible to implement the proposed duty hour limits in a pediatric residency, but it would require a significant increase in the resident workforce (at least 25% and possibly 50%) to care for the same number of patients. Furthermore, the education model would need to undergo significant changes. Further trials of the IOM recommendations are needed prior to widespread implementation in order to learn what works best and causes the least harm, disruption, and unnecessary cost to the system.
doi:10.4300/JGME-D-09-00067.1
PMCID: PMC2931251  PMID: 21975975
7.  Duty Hour Recommendations and Implications for Meeting the ACGME Core Competencies: Views of Residency Directors 
Mayo Clinic Proceedings  2011;86(3):185-191.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the views of residency program directors regarding the effect of the 2010 duty hour recommendations on the 6 core competencies of graduate medical education.
METHODS: US residency program directors in internal medicine, pediatrics, and general surgery were e-mailed a survey from July 8 through July 20, 2010, after the 2010 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) duty hour recommendations were published. Directors were asked to rate the implications of the new recommendations for the 6 ACGME core competencies as well as for continuity of inpatient care and resident fatigue.
RESULTS: Of 719 eligible program directors, 464 (65%) responded. Most program directors believe that the new ACGME recommendations will decrease residents' continuity with hospitalized patients (404/464 [87%]) and will not change (303/464 [65%]) or will increase (26/464 [6%]) resident fatigue. Additionally, most program directors (249-363/464 [53%-78%]) believe that the new duty hour restrictions will decrease residents' ability to develop competency in 5 of the 6 core areas. Surgery directors were more likely than internal medicine directors to believe that the ACGME recommendations will decrease residents' competency in patient care (odds ratio [OR], 3.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.5-6.3), medical knowledge (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-3.2), practice-based learning and improvement (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.7-4.4), interpersonal and communication skills (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-3.0), and professionalism (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.5-4.0).
CONCLUSION: Residency program directors' reactions to ACGME duty hour recommendations demonstrate a marked degree of concern about educating a competent generation of future physicians in the face of increasing duty hour standards and regulation.
The reactions of residency program directors to the ACGME duty hour recommendations demonstrate a marked degree of concern about educating a competent generation of future physicians in the face of increasing duty hour standards and regulation.
doi:10.4065/mcp.2010.0635
PMCID: PMC3046937  PMID: 21307391
8.  Accuracy of Residents' Retrospective Perceptions of 16-Hour Call Admitting Shift Compliance and Characteristics 
Background
The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Resident-Fellow Survey measurement of compliance with duty hours uses remote retrospective resident report, the accuracy of which has not been studied. We investigated residents' remote recall of 16-hour call-shift compliance and workload characteristics at 1 institution.
Methods
We sent daily surveys to second- and third-year internal medicine residents immediately after call shifts from July 2011 to June 2012 to assess compliance with 16-hour shift length and workload characteristics. In June 2012, we sent a survey with identical items to assess residents' retrospective perceptions of their call-shift compliance and workload characteristics over the preceding year. We used linear models to compare on-call data to residents' retrospective data.
Results
We received a survey response from residents after 497 of 648 call-shifts (77% response). The end-of-year perceptions survey was completed by 87 of 95 residents (92%). Compared with on-call data, the recollections of 5 (6%) residents were accurate; however, 48 (56%) underestimated and 33 (38%) overestimated compliance with the 16-hour shift length requirement. The average magnitude of under- and overestimation was 18% (95% confidence interval  =  13–23). Using a greater than 10% absolute difference to define under- and overestimation, 39 (45%) respondents were found to be accurate, 27 (31%) underestimated compliance, and 20 (23%) overestimated compliance. Residents overestimated census size, long call admissions, and admissions after 5 pm.
Conclusions
Internal medicine residents' remote retrospective reporting of compliance with the 16-hour limit on continuous duty and workload characteristics was inaccurate compared with their immediate recall and included errors of underestimation and overestimation.
doi:10.4300/JGME-D-12-00311.1
PMCID: PMC3886463  PMID: 24455013
9.  Toward a New Paradigm in Graduate Medical Education in the United States: Elimination of the 24-Hour Call 
Background
Sleep deprivation negatively affects resident performance, education, and safety. Concerns over these effects have prompted efforts to reduce resident hours. This article describes the design and implementation of a scheduling system with no continuous 24-hour calls. Aims included meeting Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education work hour requirements without increasing resident complement, maximizing continuity of learning and patient care, maintaining patient care quality, and acceptance by residents, faculty, and administration.
Methods
Various coverage options were formulated and discussed. The final schedule was the product of consensus. After re-engineering the master rotation schedule, service-specific conversion of on-call schedules was initiated in July 2003 and completed in July 2004. Annual in-training and certifying examination performance, length of stay, patient mortalities, resident motor vehicle accidents/near misses, and resident satisfaction with the new scheduling system were tracked.
Results
Continuous 24-hour call has been eliminated from the program since July 2004, with the longest assigned shift being 14 hours. Residents have at least 1 free weekend per month, a 10-hour break between consecutive assigned duty hours, and a mandatory 4-hour “nap” break if assigned a night shift immediately following a day shift. Program-wide, duty hours average 66 hours per week for first-year residents, 63 hours per week for second-year residents, and 60 hours per week for third-year residents. Self-reported motor vehicle accidents and/or near misses of accidents significantly decreased (P < .001) and resident satisfaction increased (P  =  .42). The change was accomplished at no additional cost to the institution and with no adverse patient care or educational outcomes.
Conclusions
Pediatric residency training with restriction to 14 consecutive duty hours is effective and well accepted by stakeholders. Five years later, the re-engineered schedule has become the new “normal” for our program.
doi:10.4300/JGME-D-09-00061.1
PMCID: PMC2931239  PMID: 21975977
10.  In the Wake of the 2003 and 2011 Duty Hours Regulations, How Do Internal Medicine Interns Spend Their Time? 
Journal of General Internal Medicine  2013;28(8):1042-1047.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND
The 2003 and 2011 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) common program requirements compress busy inpatient schedules and increase intern supervision. At the same time, interns wrestle with the effects of electronic medical record systems, including documentation needs and availability of an ever-increasing amount of stored patient data.
OBJECTIVE
In light of these changes, we conducted a time motion study to determine how internal medicine interns spend their time in the hospital.
DESIGN
Descriptive, observational study on inpatient ward rotations at two internal medicine residency programs at large academic medical centers in Baltimore, MD during January, 2012.
PARTICIPANTS
Twenty-nine interns at the two residency programs.
MAIN MEASURES
The primary outcome was percent of time spent in direct patient care (talking with and examining patients). Secondary outcomes included percent of time spent in indirect patient care, education, and miscellaneous activities (eating, sleeping, and walking). Results were analyzed using multilevel regression analysis adjusted for clustering at the observer and intern levels.
KEY RESULTS
Interns were observed for a total of 873 hours. Interns spent 12 % of their time in direct patient care, 64 % in indirect patient care, 15 % in educational activities, and 9 % in miscellaneous activities. Computer use occupied 40 % of interns’ time. There was no significant difference in time spent in these activities between the two sites.
CONCLUSIONS
Interns today spend a minority of their time directly caring for patients. Compared with interns in time motion studies prior to 2003, interns in our study spent less time in direct patient care and sleeping, and more time talking with other providers and documenting. Reduced work hours in the setting of increasing complexity of medical inpatients, growing volume of patient data, and increased supervision may limit the amount of time interns spend with patients.
doi:10.1007/s11606-013-2376-6
PMCID: PMC3710392  PMID: 23595927
residency work hours; graduate medical education; time motion
11.  Changing the Formula of Residents' Work Hours in Internal Medicine: Moving From “Years in Training” to “Hours in Training” 
Background
In a recent report, the Institute of Medicine recommended more restrictions on residents' working hours. Several problems exist with a system that places a weekly limit on resident duty hours: (1) it assumes the presence of a linear relationship between hours of work and patient safety; (2) it fails to consider differences in intensity among programs; and (3) it does not address increases in the scientific content of medicine, and it places the burden of enforcing the duty hour limits on the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education.
Proposal
An innovative method of calculating credit hours for graduate medical education would shift the focus from “years of residency” to “hours of residency.” For example, internal medicine residents would be requested to spend 8640 hours of total training hours (assuming 60 hours per week for 48 weeks annually) instead of the traditional 3 years. This method of counting training hours is used by other professions, such as the Intern Development Program of the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards. The proposed approach would allow residents and program directors to pace training based on individual capabilities. Standards for resident education should include the average number of patients treated in each setting (inpatient or outpatient). A possible set of “multipliers” based on these parameters, and possibly others such as resident evaluation, is devised to calculate the “final adjusted accredited hours” that count toward graduation.
Anticipated Benefits
Substituting “years of training” with “hours of training” may resolve many of the concerns with the current residency education model, as well as adapt to the demands of residents' personal lives. It also may allow residents to pace their training according to their capabilities and learning styles, and contribute to reflective learning and better quality education.
doi:10.4300/JGME-D-10-00158.1
PMCID: PMC3186269  PMID: 22379516
12.  On-site Night Float by Attending Physicians: A Model to Improve Resident Education and Patient Care 
Background
In 2003, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education instituted common duty hour limits, and in 2008 the Institute of Medicine recommended additional limits on continuous duty hours. Using a night-float system is an accepted approach for adhering to duty hour mandates.
Objective
To determine the effect of an on-site night-float attending physician on resident education and patient care.
Methods
Night-float residents and daytime ward residents were surveyed at the end of their rotation about the impact of an on-site night-float attending physician on education and quality of patient care. Responses were provided on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1, strongly agree, to 5, strongly disagree.
Results
Overall, 92 of the 140 distributed surveys were completed (66% response rate). Night-float residents found the night-float attending physician to be helpful with cross-cover issues (mean  =  2.00), initial history and physical examination (mean  =  1.56), choosing appropriate diagnostic tests (mean  =  1.79), developing a treatment plan (mean  =  1.74), and improving overall patient care (mean  =  1.91). Daytime ward residents were very satisfied with the quality of the admission workups (mean  =  1.78), tests and diagnostic procedures (mean  =  1.76), and initial treatment plan (mean  =  1.62) provided by the night-float service.
Conclusion
A night-float system that includes on-site attending physician supervision can provide a valuable opportunity for resident education and may help improve the quality of patient care.
doi:10.4300/JGME-D-09-00073.1
PMCID: PMC2931221  PMID: 21975885
13.  Factors Associated with Non-Compliance During 16-Hour Long Call Shifts 
Journal of General Internal Medicine  2012;27(11):1424-1431.
Background
Duty hour restrictions limit shift length to 16 hours during the 1st post-graduate year. Although many programs utilize a 16-hour “long call” admitting shift on inpatient services, compliance with the 16-hour shift length and factors responsible for extended shifts have not been well examined.
Objective
To identify the incidence of and operational factors associated with extended long call shifts and residents’ perceptions of the safety and educational value of the 16-hour long call shift in a large internal medicine residency program.
Design, Participants, and Main Measures
Between August and December of 2010, residents were sent an electronic survey immediately following 16-hour long call shifts, assessing departure time and shift characteristics. We used logistic regression to identify independent predictors of extended shifts. In mid-December, all residents received a second survey to assess perceptions of the long call admitting model.
Key Results
Two-hundred and thirty surveys were completed (95 %). Overall, 92 of 230 (40 %) shifts included ≥1 team member exceeding the 16-hour limit. Factors independently associated with extended shifts per 3-member team were 3–4 patients (adjusted OR 5.2, 95 % CI 1.9–14.3) and > 4 patients (OR 10.6, 95 % CI 3.3–34.6) admitted within 6 hours of scheduled departure and > 6 total admissions (adjusted OR 2.9, 95 % CI 1.05–8.3). Seventy-nine of 96 (82 %) residents completed the perceptions survey. Residents believed, on average, teams could admit 4.5 patients after 5 pm and 7 patients during long call shifts to ensure compliance. Regarding the long call shift, 73 % agreed it allows for safe patient care, 60 % disagreed/were neutral about working too many hours, and 53 % rated the educational value in the top 33 % of a 9-point scale.
Conclusions
Compliance with the 16-hour long call shift is sensitive to total workload and workload timing factors. Knowledge of such factors should guide systems redesign aimed at achieving compliance while ensuring patient care and educational opportunities.
doi:10.1007/s11606-012-2047-z
PMCID: PMC3475826  PMID: 22528621
medical education-graduate; medical education; systems-based practice; duty hours
14.  A Systematic Review of the Effects of Resident Duty Hour Restrictions in Surgery 
Annals of Surgery  2014;259(6):1041-1053.
A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the impact of resident duty hours (RDH) on clinical and educational outcomes in surgery. A total of 135 articles met inclusion criteria. In surgery, recent RDH changes are not consistently associated with improved resident well-being and may have negative impacts on patient outcomes and education.
Background:
In 2003, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) mandated 80-hour resident duty limits. In 2011 the ACGME mandated 16-hour duty maximums for PGY1 (post graduate year) residents. The stated goals were to improve patient safety, resident well-being, and education. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the impact of resident duty hours (RDH) on clinical and educational outcomes in surgery.
Methods:
A systematic review (1980–2013) was executed on CINAHL, Cochrane Database, Embase, Medline, and Scopus. Quality of articles was assessed using the GRADE guidelines. Sixteen-hour shifts and night float systems were analyzed separately. Articles that examined mortality data were combined in a random-effects meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of RDH on patient mortality.
Results:
A total of 135 articles met the inclusion criteria. Among these, 42% (N = 57) were considered moderate-high quality. There was no overall improvement in patient outcomes as a result of RDH; however, some studies suggest increased complication rates in high-acuity patients. There was no improvement in education related to RDH restrictions, and performance on certification examinations has declined in some specialties. Survey studies revealed a perception of worsened education and patient safety. There were improvements in resident wellness after the 80-hour workweek, but there was little improvement or negative effects on wellness after 16-hour duty maximums were implemented.
Conclusions:
Recent RDH changes are not consistently associated with improvements in resident well-being, and have negative impacts on patient outcomes and performance on certification examinations. Greater flexibility to accommodate resident training needs is required. Further erosion of training time should be considered with great caution.
doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000000595
PMCID: PMC4047317  PMID: 24662409
burnout; patient outcomes; patient safety; postgraduate surgical training; residents; resident duty hours; resident wellness; surgical education
15.  Internal Medicine Residents' Clinical and Didactic Experiences After Work Hour Regulation 
BACKGROUND
Work hour regulations for house staff were intended in part to improve resident clinical and educational performance.
OBJECTIVE
To characterize the effect of work hour regulation on internal medicine resident inpatient clinical experience and didactic education.
DESIGN
Cross-sectional mail survey.
PARTICIPANTS
Chief residents at all accredited U.S. internal medicine residency programs outside New York.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS
The response rate was 62% (202/324). Most programs (72%) reported no change in average patient load per intern after work hour regulation. Many programs (48%) redistributed house staff admissions through the call cycle. The number of admissions per intern on long call (the day interns have the most admitting responsibility) decreased in 31% of programs, and the number of admissions on other days increased in 21% of programs. Residents on outpatient rotations were given new ward responsibilities in 36% of programs. Third-year resident ward and float time increased in 34% of programs, while third-year elective time decreased in 22% of programs. The mean weekly hours allotted to educational activities did not change significantly (12.7 vs 12.4, P = .12), but 56% of programs reported a decrease in intern attendance at educational activities.
CONCLUSIONS
In response to work hour regulation, many internal medicine programs redistributed rather than reduced residents' inpatient clinical experience. Hours allotted to educational activities did not change; however, most programs saw a decrease in intern attendance at conferences, and many reduced third-year elective time.
doi:10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00508.x
PMCID: PMC1831597  PMID: 16918742
internship and residency; workload; education; personnel staffing; scheduling
16.  Service Census Caps and Unit-Based Admissions: Resident Workload, Conference Attendance, Duty Hour Compliance, and Patient Safety 
Mayo Clinic Proceedings  2012;87(4):320-327.
Objective
To examine the effect of census caps and unit-based admissions on resident workload, conference attendance, duty hour compliance, and patient safety.
Participants and Methods
We implemented a census cap of 14 patients on 6 Mayo Clinic internal medicine resident hospital services and a unit-based admissions process in which patients and care teams were consolidated within hospital units. All 280 residents and 15,926 patient admissions to resident and nonresident services 1 year before the intervention (September 1, 2006, through August 31, 2007) and 1 year after the intervention (May 1, 2008, through April 30, 2009) were included. Residents' workload, conference attendance, and duty hours were tracked electronically. Patient safety variables including Rapid Response Team and cardiopulmonary resuscitation events, intensive care unit transfers, Patient Safety Indicators, and 30-day readmissions were compared preintervention and postintervention.
Results
After the intervention, residents' mean (SE) ratings of workload appropriateness improved (3.10 [0.08] vs 3.87 [0.08] on a 5-point scale; P<.001), as did conference attendance (1523 [56. 8%] vs 1700 [63.5%] conferences attended; P<.001). Duty hour violations for working more than 30 consecutive hours and not having 10 hours off between duty periods decreased from 77 of 9490 possible violations (0.81%) to 27 (0.28%) and from 70 (0.74%) to 14 (0.15%) violations, respectively (both, P<.001). Thirty-day readmissions to resident services decreased (1010 [18.14%] vs 682 [15. 37%]; P<.001). All other patient safety measures remained unchanged. After adjustment for illness severity, there were no significant differences in patient outcomes between resident and nonresident services.
Conclusion
Census caps and unit-based admissions were associated with improvements in resident workload, conference attendance, duty hour compliance, and readmission rates while patient outcomes were maintained.
doi:10.1016/j.mayocp.2011.12.012
PMCID: PMC3538463  PMID: 22469344
CPR, cardiopulmonary resuscitation; ICU, intensive care unit; RRT, Rapid Response Team
17.  Correlation Between Self-Reported Resident Duty Hours and Time-Stamped Parking Data 
Background
Failure to comply with Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-mandated resident work hour limitations can result in citations and shortened accreditation cycles. Many programs assess compliance by collecting self-reports of work hours from each resident.
Objectives
To examine residents' self-reported assessment of work hours recorded on a daily basis using a Web-based product with electronically recorded times collected as residents entered and exited the parking garage.
Methods
Study participants consisted of 62 University of Colorado Denver internal medicine residents rotating at Denver Health Medical Center on a monthly basis over a 4-month period. Self-reported data submitted by 60 residents were compared with the times these residents entered and exited from the parking garage at Denver Health Medical Center, as assessed by an electronic badge reader.
Results
A high level of agreement was found between these two data sets. No significant difference was found between the time-stamped parking data and self-reported Web-based data for resident work hours.
Conclusions
Residents accurately self-reported their work hours, using a daily Web-based duty hours log when compared to an independent, objective and blinded assessment of work hours.
doi:10.4300/JGME-D-11-00142.1
PMCID: PMC3399623  PMID: 23730452
18.  Accreditation council for graduate medical education (ACGME) annual anesthesiology residency and fellowship program review: a "report card" model for continuous improvement 
BMC Medical Education  2010;10:13.
Background
The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requires an annual evaluation of all ACGME-accredited residency and fellowship programs to assess program quality. The results of this evaluation must be used to improve the program. This manuscript describes a metric to be used in conducting ACGME-mandated annual program review of ACGME-accredited anesthesiology residencies and fellowships.
Methods
A variety of metrics to assess anesthesiology residency and fellowship programs are identified by the authors through literature review and considered for use in constructing a program "report card."
Results
Metrics used to assess program quality include success in achieving American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) certification, performance on the annual ABA/American Society of Anesthesiology In-Training Examination, performance on mock oral ABA certification examinations, trainee scholarly activities (publications and presentations), accreditation site visit and internal review results, ACGME and alumni survey results, National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) results, exit interview feedback, diversity data and extensive program/rotation/faculty/curriculum evaluations by trainees and faculty. The results are used to construct a "report card" that provides a high-level review of program performance and can be used in a continuous quality improvement process.
Conclusions
An annual program review is required to assess all ACGME-accredited residency and fellowship programs to monitor and improve program quality. We describe an annual review process based on metrics that can be used to focus attention on areas for improvement and track program performance year-to-year. A "report card" format is described as a high-level tool to track educational outcomes.
doi:10.1186/1472-6920-10-13
PMCID: PMC2830223  PMID: 20141641
19.  Residents' Perceptions of Professionalism in Training and Practice: Barriers, Promoters, and Duty Hour Requirements 
BACKGROUND
The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education duty hour requirements may affect residents' understanding and practice of professionalism.
OBJECTIVE
We explored residents' perceptions about the current teaching and practice of professionalism in residency and the impact of duty hour requirements.
DESIGN
Anonymous cross-sectional survey.
PARTICIPANTS
Internal medicine, neurology, and family practice residents at 3 teaching hospitals (n = 312).
MEASUREMENTS
Using Likert scales and open-ended questions, the questionnaire explored the following: residents' attitudes about the principles of professionalism, the current and their preferred methods for teaching professionalism, barriers or promoters of professionalism, and how implementation of duty hours has affected professionalism.
RESULTS
One hundred and sixty-nine residents (54%) responded. Residents rated most principles of professionalism as highly important to daily practice (91.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 90.0 to 92.7) and training (84.7%, 95% CI 83.0 to 86.4), but fewer rated them as highly easy to incorporate into daily practice (62.1%, 95% CI 59.9 to 64.3), particularly conflicts of interest (35.3%, 95% CI 28.0 to 42.7) and self-awareness (32.0%, 95% CI 24.9 to 39.1). Role-modeling was the teaching method most residents preferred. Barriers to practicing professionalism included time constraints, workload, and difficulties interacting with challenging patients. Promoters included role-modeling by faculty and colleagues and a culture of professionalism. Regarding duty hour limits, residents perceived less time to communicate with patients, continuity of care, and accountability toward their colleagues, but felt that limits improved professionalism by promoting resident well-being and teamwork.
CONCLUSIONS
Residents perceive challenges to incorporating professionalism into their daily practice. The duty hour implementation offers new challenges and opportunities for negotiating the principles of professionalism.
doi:10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00496.x
PMCID: PMC1924703  PMID: 16808778
medical education; residency; professionalism; work hours
20.  Effect of a Protected Sleep Period on Hours Slept During Extended Overnight In-hospital Duty Hours Among Medical Interns 
Context
A 2009 Institute of Medicine report recommended protected sleep periods for medicine trainees on extended overnight shifts, a position reinforced by new Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requirements.
Objective
To evaluate the feasibility and consequences of protected sleep periods during extended duty.
Design, Setting, and Participants
Randomized controlled trial conducted at the Philadelphia VA Medical Center medical service and Oncology Unit of the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (2009–2010). Of the 106 interns and senior medical students who consented, 3 were not scheduled on any study rotations. Among the others, 44 worked at the VA center, 16 at the university hospital, and 43 at both.
Intervention
Twelve 4-week blocks were randomly assigned to either a standard intern schedule (extended duty overnight shifts of up to 30 hours; equivalent to 1200 overnight intern shifts at each site), or a protected sleep period (protected time from 12:30 AM to 5:30 AM with handover of work cell phone; equivalent to 1200 overnight intern shifts at each site). Participants were asked to wear wrist actigraphs and complete sleep diaries.
Main Outcome Measures
Primary outcome was hours slept during the protected period on extended duty overnight shifts. Secondary outcome measures included hours slept during a 24-hour period (noon to noon) by day of call cycle and Karolinska sleepiness scale.
Results
For 98.3% of on-call nights, cell phones were signed out as designed. At the VA center, participants with protected sleep had a mean 2.86 hours (95% CI, 2.57–3.10 hours) of sleep vs 1.98 hours (95% CI, 1.68–2.28 hours) among those who did not have protected hours of sleep (P < .001). At the university hospital, participants with protected sleep had a mean 3.04 hours (95% CI, 2.77–3.45 hours) of sleep vs 2.04 hours (95% CI, 1.79–2.24) among those who did not have protected sleep (P <.001). Participants with protected sleep were significantly less likely to have call nights with no sleep: 5.8% (95% CI, 3.0%–8.5%) vs 18.6% (95% CI, 13.9%–23.2%) at the VA center (P <.001) and 5.9% (95% CI, 3.1%–8.7%) vs 14.2% (95% CI, 9.9%–18.4%) at the university hospital (P=.001). Participants felt less sleepy after on-call nights in the intervention group, with Karolinska sleepiness scale scores of 6.65 (95% CI, 6.35–6.97) vs 7.10 (95% CI, 6.85–7.33; P=.01) at the VA center and 5.91 (95% CI, 5.64–6.16) vs 6.79 (95% CI, 6.57–7.04; P <.001) at the university hospital.
Conclusions
For internal medicine services at 2 hospitals, implementation of a protected sleep period while on call resulted in an increase in overnight sleep duration and improved alertness the next morning.
Trial Registration
clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00874510.
doi:10.1001/jama.2012.34490
PMCID: PMC3600853  PMID: 23212498
21.  Anticipated Consequences of the 2011 Duty Hours Standards: Views of Internal Medicine and Surgery Program Directors 
Academic Medicine  2012;87(7):895-903.
Purpose
To assess internal medicine (IM) and surgery program directors’ views of the likely effects of the 2011 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education duty hours regulations.
Method
In fall 2010, investigators surveyed IM and surgery program directors, assessing their views of the likely impact of the 2011 duty hours standards on learning environment, workload, education opportunities, program administration, and patient outcomes.
Results
Of 381 IM program directors, 287 (75.3%) responded; of 225 surgery program directors, 118 (52.4%) responded. Significantly more surgeons than internists indicated that the new regulations would likely negatively impact learning climate, including faculty morale and residents’ relationships (P < 0.001). Most leaders in both specialties (80.8% IM, 80.2% surgery) felt that the regulations would likely increase faculty workload (P = .73). Both IM (82.2%) and surgery (96.6%) leaders most often rated, of all education opportunities, first-year resident clinical experience to be adversely affected (P < .001). Respondents from both specialties indicated that they will hire more nonphysician/midlevel providers (59.5% IM, 89.0% surgery, P < .001) and use more nonteaching services (66.8% IM, 70.1% surgery, P = .81). Respondents expect patient safety (45.1% IM, 76.9% surgery, P < .001) and continuity of care (83.6% IM across all training levels, 97.5% surgery regarding first-year residents) to decrease.
Conclusions
IM and surgery program directors agree that the 2011 duty hours regulations will likely negatively affect the quality of the learning environment, workload, education opportunities, program administration, and patient outcomes. Careful evaluation of actual impact is important.
doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182584118
PMCID: PMC3386358  PMID: 22622221
22.  Impact of Duty Hour Regulations on Medical Students’ Education: Views of Key Clinical Faculty 
Journal of General Internal Medicine  2008;23(7):1084-1089.
BACKGROUND
Teaching faculty have valuable perspectives on the impact of residency duty hour regulations on medical students.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to elicit faculty views on the impact of residency duty hour regulations on medical students’ educational experience on inpatient medicine rotations.
DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS
We conducted a National Survey of Key Clinical Faculty (KCF) at 40 internal medicine residency programs affiliated with U.S. medical schools using a random sample stratified by National Institutes of Health funding and program size.
MEASUREMENTS
This study measures KCF opinions on the effect of duty hour regulations on students’ education.
RESULTS
Of 154 KCF targeted, 111 responded (72%). Fifty-two percent of KCF reported worsening in the overall quality of students’ education compared to just 2.7% reporting improvement (p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis adjusted for gender, academic rank, specialty, and years of teaching experience, faculty who spent ≥15 hours per week teaching were more likely to report worsening in medical students’ level of responsibility on inpatient teams [odds ratio (OR) 3.1; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3–7.6], ability to follow patients throughout hospitalization (OR 3.2; 95% CI 1.3–7.9), ability to develop working relationships with residents (OR 2.3; 95% CI 1.0–5.2), and the overall quality of students’ education (OR 3.3; 95% CI 1.4–8.1) compared to faculty who spent less time teaching.
CONCLUSION
Key clincal faculty report concerns about the impact of duty hour regulations on aspects of medical students’ education in internal medicine. Medical schools and residency programs should identify ways to ensure optimal educational experiences for students within duty hour requirements.
doi:10.1007/s11606-008-0532-1
PMCID: PMC2517919  PMID: 18612749
medical students; residents; duty hours; key clinical faculty; internal medicine
23.  Effects of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Work Hour Restrictions on Medical Student Experience 
Background
Residents have a major role in teaching students, yet little has been written about the effects of resident work hour restrictions on medical student education.
Objective
Our objective was to determine the effects of resident work hour restrictions on medical student education.
Design
We compared student responses pre work hour restrictions with those completed post work hour restrictions.
Participants
Students on required Internal Medicine, Surgery, and Pediatric clerkships at the University of Minnesota.
Measurements
Two thousand eight hundred twenty-five student responses on end-of-clerkship surveys.
Results
Students reported 1.6 more hours per week of teaching by residents (95%CI 0.8–2.6) in the post work hours era. Students’ ratings of the overall quality of their teaching on the ward did not change appreciably, 0.05 points’ decline on a 5-point scale (P = .05). Like the residents, students worked fewer hours per week (avg. 1.5 hours less, 95%CI 0.4–2.6). There was no change in quality or quantity of attending teaching, students’ relationships with their patients, or the overall value of the clerkships.
Conclusions
Whereas resident duty hour restrictions at our institution have had minimal effect on students’ ratings of the overall teaching quality, they do report being taught more by their residents. This may be a factor of decreased resident fatigue or an increased sense of well-being; but more study is needed to clarify the causes of our observations.
doi:10.1007/s11606-007-0196-2
PMCID: PMC2219733  PMID: 17450390
work hours; medical students; residents; medical education
24.  A Thematic Review of Resident Commentary on Duty Hours and Supervision Regulations 
Background
The implementation on July 1, 2011, of new Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) standards for resident supervision and duty hours has prompted considerable debate about the potential positive and negative effects of these changes on patient care and resident education. A recent large-sample study analyzed resident responses to these changes, using a Likert scale response. In this same study, 874 residents also provided free-text comments, which provide added insight into resident perspectives on duty hours and supervision.
Methods
A mixed-methods quantitative and qualitative survey of residents was conducted in August 2010 to assess resident perceptions of the proposed ACGME regulations. Common concerns in the residents' free responses were synthesized and quantified using content analysis, a common method for qualitative research.
Results
A total of 11 617 residents received the survey. Completed surveys were received from 2561 residents (22.0%), with 874 residents (34.1%) providing free-text responses. Most residents (83.0%) expressed unfavorable opinions about the new standards. The most frequently cited concerns included coverage issues, and a negative impact on patient care and education, as well as lack of preparation for senior roles. A smaller portion of residents commented they thought the standards would contribute to improvements in quality of life (36.1%) and patient care (4.9%).
Conclusions
ACGME standards are important for graduate medical education, and their aim is to promote high-quality education and better care to patients in teaching institutions. Yet, many residents are concerned about the day-to-day impact of the 2011 regulations, in particular the 16-hour duty period for interns. Most residents who provided free-text responses had a negative impression of the new ACGME regulations. Residents' resistance to duty hour changes may represent a realization that residents are losing a central role in patient care. The concerns identified in this study demonstrate important issues for administrators and policymakers. Resident ideas and opinions should be considered in future revisions of ACGME requirements.
doi:10.4300/JGME-D-11-00259.1
PMCID: PMC3546574  PMID: 24294421
25.  Does doctors’ workload impact supervision and ward activities of final-year students? A prospective study 
BMC Medical Education  2012;12:24.
Background
Hospital doctors face constantly increasing workloads. Besides caring for patients, their duties also comprise the education of future colleagues. The aim of this study was to objectively investigate whether the workload arising from increased patient care interferes with student supervision and is associated with more non-medical activities of final-year medical students.
Methods
A total of 54 final-year students were asked to keep a diary of their daily activities over a three-week period at the beginning of their internship in Internal Medicine. Students categorized their activities – both medical and non-medical - according to whether they had: (1) only watched, (2) assisted the ward resident, (3) performed the activity themselves under supervision of the ward resident, or (4) performed the activity without supervision. The activities reported on a particular day were matched with a ward specific workload-index derived from the hospital information system, including the number of patients treated on the corresponding ward on that day, a correction factor according to the patient comorbidity complexity level (PCCL), and the number of admissions and discharges. Both students and ward residents were blinded to the study question.
Results
A total of 32 diaries (59 %, 442 recorded working days) were handed back. Overall, the students reported 1.2 ± 1.3 supervised, 1.8 ±1.6 medical and 3.6 ± 1.7 non-medical activities per day. The more supervised activities were reported, the more the number of reported medical activities increased (p < .0001). No relationship between the ward specific workload and number of medical activities could be shown.
Conclusions
There was a significant association between ward doctors’ supervision of students and the number of medical activities performed by medical students. The workload had no significant effect on supervision or the number of medical or non-medical activities of final-year students.
doi:10.1186/1472-6920-12-24
PMCID: PMC3372449  PMID: 22540897

Results 1-25 (1075253)