Duty Hour Reporting: Conflicting Values in Professionalism.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Duty hour limits challenge professional values, sometimes forcing residents to choose between patient care and regulatory compliance. This may affect truthfulness in duty hour reporting.Objective
We assessed residents' reasons for falsifying duty hour reports.Methods
We surveyed residents in 1 sponsoring institution to explore the reasons for noncompliance, frequency of violations, falsification of reports, and the residents' awareness of the option to extend hours to care for a single patient. The analysis used descriptive statistics. Linear regression was used to explore falsification of duty hour reports by year of training.Results
The response rate was 88% (572 of 650). Primary reasons for duty hour violations were number of patients (19%) and individual patient acuity/complexity (19%). Junior residents were significantly more likely to falsify duty hours (R = -0.966). Of 124 residents who acknowledged falsification, 51 (41%) identified the primary reason as concern that the program will be in jeopardy of violating the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) duty hour limits followed by fear of punishment (34, 27%). This accounted for more than two-thirds of the primary reasons for falsification.Conclusions
Residents' falsification of duty hour data appears to be motivated by concerns about adverse actions from the ACGME, and fear they might be punished. To foster professionalism, we recommend that sponsoring institutions educate residents about professionalism in duty hour reporting. The ACGME should also convey the message that duty hour limits be applied in a no-blame systems-based approach, and allow junior residents to extend duty hours for the care of individual patients.
SUBMITTER: Byrne JM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4597950 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education duty hour requirements may affect residents' understanding and practice of professionalism.ObjectiveWe explored residents' perceptions about the current teaching and practice of professionalism in residency and the impact of duty hour requirements.DesignAnonymous cross-sectional survey.ParticipantsInternal medicine, neurology, and family practice residents at 3 teaching hospitals (n=312).MeasurementsUsing 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.ResultsOne 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.ConclusionsResidents perceive challenges to incorporating professionalism into their daily practice. The duty hour implementation offers new challenges and opportunities for negotiating the principles of professionalism.
| S-EPMC1924703 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education 2011 duty hour standards became effective on 7 1, 2011. One of the new standards allows residents to exceed the limit on continuous duty hours in unusual circumstances relating to patient or family need or rare educational opportunities. There are no data about how often or in what circumstances residents would consider exceeding their duty hour limits using this new provision in the standards. We surveyed internal medicine residents to explore these questions. METHODS: We conducted an anonymous cross-sectional survey of internal medicine residents at a midwestern tertiary-care hospital to determine how often they had considered exceeding duty hour limits in the preceding 2 weeks. We analyzed responses using descriptive statistics and χ(2) tests for comparisons. RESULTS: We obtained responses from 51 of 86 residents (59%). Of those residents, 69% (35/51) indicated that they had wanted to exceed duty hour limits at least once in the prior 2 weeks. The most common reason cited was to provide continuity of care for a patient. The 24 + 6-hour rule was the standard most likely to be broken (cited by 66%; 23/35). CONCLUSIONS: Program leadership should anticipate that residents will commonly identify situations in which they will consider exceeding duty hour limits. It will be important to provide guidance to residents early in the year about the situations that would be appropriate for the application of this new standard.
| S-EPMC3244329 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundChanges in resident duty hours in Europe and North America have had a major impact on the internal organizational dynamics of health care organizations. This paper examines, and assesses the impact of, organizational interventions that were a direct response to these duty hour reforms.MethodsThe academic literature was searched through the SCOPUS database using the search terms "resident duty hours" and "European Working Time Directive," together with terms related to organizational factors. The search was limited to English-language literature published between January 2003 and January 2012. Studies were included if they reported an organizational intervention and measured an organizational outcome.ResultsTwenty-five articles were included from the United States (n=18), the United Kingdom (n=5), Hong Kong (n=1), and Australia (n=1). They all described single-site projects; the majority used post-intervention surveys (n=15) and audit techniques (n=4). The studies assessed organizational measures, including relationships among staff, work satisfaction, continuity of care, workflow, compliance, workload, and cost. Interventions included using new technologies to improve handovers and communications, changing staff mixes, and introducing new shift structures, all of which had varying effects on the organizational measures listed previously.ConclusionsLittle research has assessed the organizational impact of duty hour reforms; however, the literature reviewed demonstrates that many organizations are using new technologies, new personnel, and revised and innovative shift structures to compensate for reduced resident coverage and to decrease the risk of limited continuity of care. Future research in this area should focus on both micro (e.g., use of technology, shift changes, staff mix) and macro (e.g., culture, leadership support) organizational aspects to aid in our understanding of how best to respond to these duty hour reforms.
| S-EPMC4304281 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Concerns persist about the effect of current duty hour reforms on resident educational outcomes. We investigated whether a flexible, less-restrictive duty hour policy (Flexible Policy) was associated with differential general surgery examination performance compared with current ACGME duty hour policy (Standard Policy).We obtained examination scores on the American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination, Qualifying Examination (written boards), and Certifying Examination (oral boards) for residents in 117 general surgery residency programs that participated in the Flexibility in Duty Hour Requirements for Surgical Trainees (FIRST) Trial. Using bivariate analyses and regression models, we compared resident examination performance across study arms (Flexible Policy vs Standard Policy) for 2015 and 2016, and 1 year of the Qualifying Examination and Certifying Examination. Adjusted analyses accounted for program-level factors, including the stratification variable for randomization.In 2016, FIRST trial participants were 4,363 general surgery residents. Mean American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination scores for residents were not significantly different between study groups (Flexible Policy vs Standard Policy) overall (Flexible Policy: mean [SD] 502.6 [100.9] vs Standard Policy: 502.7 [98.6]; p = 0.98) or for any individual postgraduate year level. There was no difference in pass rates between study arms for either the Qualifying Examination (Flexible Policy: 90.4% vs Standard Policy: 90.5%; p = 0.99) or Certifying Examination (Flexible Policy: 86.3% vs Standard Policy: 88.6%; p = 0.24). Results from adjusted analyses were consistent with these findings.Flexible, less-restrictive duty hour policies were not associated with differences in general surgery resident performance on examinations during the FIRST Trial. However, more years under flexible duty hour policies might be needed to observe an effect.
| S-EPMC5851285 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Resident duty hour reforms of 2003 had the potential to create a major impact on the delivery of inpatient care.We examine whether the reforms influenced the probability of a patient experiencing a prolonged hospital length of stay (PLOS), a measure reflecting either inefficiency of care or the development of complications that may slow the rate of discharge.Conditional logistic models to compare PLOS in more versus less teaching-intensive hospitals before and after the reform, adjusting for patient comorbidities, common time trends, and hospital site.Medicare (N = 6,059,015) and Veterans Affairs (VA) (N = 210,276) patients admitted for medical conditions (acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, or gastrointestinal bleeding) or surgical procedures (general, orthopedic, and vascular) from July 2000 to June 2005.Prolonged length of stay.Modeling all medical conditions together, the odds of prolonged stay in the first year post reform at more versus less teaching intensive hospitals was 1.01 (95% CI: 0.97-1.05) for Medicare and 1.07 (0.94-1.20) for the VA. Results were similarly negative in the second year post reform. For "combined surgery" the post year 1 odds ratios were 1.04 (0.98-1.09) and 0.94 (0.78-1.14) for Medicare and the VA respectively, and similarly unchanged in post year 2. Isolated increases in the probability of prolonged stay did occur for some vascular surgery procedures.Hospitals generally found ways to cope with duty hour reform without increasing the prevalence of prolonged hospital stays, a marker of either inefficient care or complications.
| S-EPMC3279179 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Concern persists that inflexible duty-hour rules in medical residency programs may adversely affect the training of physicians. METHODS:We randomly assigned 63 internal medicine residency programs in the United States to be governed by standard duty-hour policies of the 2011 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) or by more flexible policies that did not specify limits on shift length or mandatory time off between shifts. Measures of educational experience included observations of the activities of interns (first-year residents), surveys of trainees (both interns and residents) and faculty, and intern examination scores. RESULTS:There were no significant between-group differences in the mean percentages of time that interns spent in direct patient care and education nor in trainees' perceptions of an appropriate balance between clinical demands and education (primary outcome for trainee satisfaction with education; response rate, 91%) or in the assessments by program directors and faculty of whether trainees' workload exceeded their capacity (primary outcome for faculty satisfaction with education; response rate, 90%). Another survey of interns (response rate, 49%) revealed that those in flexible programs were more likely to report dissatisfaction with multiple aspects of training, including educational quality (odds ratio, 1.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02 to 2.73) and overall well-being (odds ratio, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.67 to 3.65). In contrast, directors of flexible programs were less likely to report dissatisfaction with multiple educational processes, including time for bedside teaching (response rate, 98%; odds ratio, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.49). Average scores (percent correct answers) on in-training examinations were 68.9% in flexible programs and 69.4% in standard programs; the difference did not meet the noninferiority margin of 2 percentage points (difference, -0.43; 95% CI, -2.38 to 1.52; P=0.06 for noninferiority). od Institute and the ACGME; iCOMPARE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02274818 .). CONCLUSIONS:There was no significant difference in the proportion of time that medical interns spent on direct patient care and education between programs with standard duty-hour policies and programs with more flexible policies. Interns in flexible programs were less satisfied with their educational experience than were their peers in standard programs, but program directors were more satisfied. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blo
| S-EPMC6101652 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundConcern persists that extended shifts in medical residency programs may adversely affect patient safety.MethodsWe conducted a cluster-randomized noninferiority trial in 63 internal-medicine residency programs during the 2015-2016 academic year. Programs underwent randomization to a group with standard duty hours, as adopted by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) in July 2011, or to a group with more flexible duty-hour rules that did not specify limits on shift length or mandatory time off between shifts. The primary outcome for each program was the change in unadjusted 30-day mortality from the pretrial year to the trial year, as ascertained from Medicare claims. We hypothesized that the change in 30-day mortality in the flexible programs would not be worse than the change in the standard programs (difference-in-difference analysis) by more than 1 percentage point (noninferiority margin). Secondary outcomes were changes in five other patient safety measures and risk-adjusted outcomes for all measures.ResultsThe change in 30-day mortality (primary outcome) among the patients in the flexible programs (12.5% in the trial year vs. 12.6% in the pretrial year) was noninferior to that in the standard programs (12.2% in the trial year vs. 12.7% in the pretrial year). The test for noninferiority was significant (P = 0.03), with an estimate of the upper limit of the one-sided 95% confidence interval (0.93%) for a between-group difference in the change in mortality that was less than the prespecified noninferiority margin of 1 percentage point. Differences in changes between the flexible programs and the standard programs in the unadjusted rate of readmission at 7 days, patient safety indicators, and Medicare payments were also below 1 percentage point; the noninferiority criterion was not met for 30-day readmissions or prolonged length of hospital stay. Risk-adjusted measures generally showed similar findings.ConclusionsAllowing program directors flexibility in adjusting duty-hour schedules for trainees did not adversely affect 30-day mortality or several other measured outcomes of patient safety. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education; iCOMPARE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02274818.).
| S-EPMC6476299 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundConcern surrounding the effect of resident fatigue on patient care recently led the National Steering Committee on Resident Duty Hours to publish Canadian recommendations suggesting that duty periods of 24 or more consecutive hours without restorative sleep should be avoided. We sought to characterize how different training programs are preparing for the effect of such changes on education, patient care and provider well-being.MethodsUsing constructivist grounded theory methodology, we conducted 18 one-on-one semistructured interviews with program directors, division directors and department chiefs from 11 residency programs affiliated with one Canadian medical school. We gathered and analyzed data iteratively until we reached theoretical saturation.ResultsThe key theme articulated by our participants was that changes in resident duty hours would potentially lead to gaps in the provision of clinical care. These changes affect acute care specialties based primarily in the inpatient setting (e.g., medicine, surgery) more than primarily ambulatory (e.g., family medicine) or shift-model based (e.g., emergency) specialties. Potential strategies to address gaps in clinical care include resident-based solutions, faculty-based solutions and solutions based on other providers (e.g., nonacademic physicians, physician extenders). Each solution has unique advantages and disadvantages in terms of education, continuity of care, preparedness for practice and provider well-being.InterpretationOur data-driven framework serves as a guide for programs to anticipate challenges of satisfying clinical care needs in the face of changes to resident duty hours, while balancing education, care continuity, preparedness for practice and provider well-being. Our findings challenge the "one-size-fits-all" approach to changes to resident duty hours and endorse flexibility in enacting duty hour regulations based on specialty-specific factors.
| S-EPMC4084747 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To examine whether hospital financial health was associated with differential changes in outcomes after implementation of 2003 ACGME duty hour regulations.Observational study of 3,614,174 Medicare patients admitted to 869 teaching hospitals from July 1, 2000 to June 30, 2005.Interrupted time series analysis using logistic regression to adjust for patient comorbidities, secular trends, and hospital site. Outcomes included 30-day mortality, AHRQ Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs), failure-to-rescue (FTR) rates, and prolonged length of stay (PLOS).All eight analyses measuring the impact of duty hour reform on mortality by hospital financial health quartile, in postreform year 1 ("Post 1") or year 2 ("Post 2") versus the prereform period, were insignificant: Post 1 OR range 1.00-1.02 and Post 2 OR range 0.99-1.02. For PSIs, all six tests showed clinically insignificant effect sizes. The FTR rate analysis demonstrated nonsignificance in both postreform years (OR 1.00 for both). The PLOS outcomes varied significantly only for the combined surgical sample in Post 2, but this effect was very small, OR 1.03 (95% CI 1.02, 1.04).The impact of 2003 ACGME duty hour reform on patient outcomes did not differ by hospital financial health. This finding is somewhat reassuring, given additional financial pressure on teaching hospitals from 2011 duty hour regulations.
| S-EPMC3626351 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to address the controversy surrounding the effects of duty hour reform on new surgeon performance, we analyzed patients treated by new surgeons following the transition to independent practice.Summary background dataIn 2003, duty hour reform affected all US surgical training programs. Its impact on the performance of new surgeons remains unstudied.MethodsWe studied 30-day mortality among 1,483,074 Medicare beneficiaries undergoing general and orthopedic operations between 1999 and 2003 ("traditional" era) and 2009 and 2013 ("modern" era). The operations were performed by 2762 new surgeons trained before the reform, 2119 new surgeons trained following reform and 15,041 experienced surgeons. We used a difference-in-differences analysis comparing outcomes in matched patients treated by new versus experienced surgeons within each era, controlling for the hospital, operation, and patient risk factors.ResultsTraditional era odds of 30-day mortality among matched patients treated by new versus experienced surgeons were significantly elevated [odds ratio (OR) 1.13; 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.05, 1.22), P < 0.001). The modern era elevated odds of mortality were not significant [OR 1.06; 95% CI (0.97-1.16), P = 0.239]. Relative performance of new and experienced surgeons with respect to 30-day mortality did not appear to change from the traditional era to the modern era [OR 0.93; 95% CI (0.83-1.05), P = 0.233]. There were statistically significant adverse changes over time in relative performance to experienced surgeons in prolonged length of stay [OR 1.08; 95% CI (1.02-1.15), P = 0.015], anesthesia time [9 min; 95% CI (8-10), P < 0.001], and costs [255USD; 95% CI (2-508), P = 0.049].ConclusionsDuty hour reform showed no significant effect on 30-day mortality achieved by new surgeons compared to their more experienced colleagues. Patients of new surgeons, however, trained after duty hour reform displayed some increases in the resources needed for their care.
| S-EPMC6861619 | biostudies-literature