Studies in JAMA suggest no improvement in mortality:
Cutting the grueling work hours of doctors-in-training had little effect on reducing patient deaths, according to two large studies . . .. . . For the groups with no change, Volpp said one possible explanation is that more patient handoffs by residents offset the benefits of reduced fatigue.
Update:
Roy Poses with his thoughts.
Related posts:
- Do resident work-hour restrictions increase surgical complications?
- Resident work hour restrictions
- Old-school doctors on resident work-hour restrictions
- Resident work hour restrictions
- Are resident work-hour restrictions doing a disservice?
- Resident work hour restrictions: Increasing surgical complications?
- Who will pick up the slack from resident work-hour restrictions?
KevinMD.com on Facebook
Scrubs
{ 3 comments }
Resident work hours and morbidity.
Another more likely explanation is that there was NO relationship between morbidity and work hours.
Good. Maybe that means residents don’t have to work like slaves and morbidity won’t increase.
The most likely explanations were that:
1. Most errors due to resident fatigue do not increase 30 day mortality, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t bad enough, and
2. Even the currently “reformed” work hours still allow a resident to work 30 hours straight, take 10 hours off, then work another 30, still leading to major sleep deprivation and fatigue.
See our posts on Health Care Renewal:
http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2007/09/why-resident-duty-hour-reform-did-not.html
http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2007/09/in-on-sleep-deprivation-and-medical.html
Comments on this entry are closed.