Dataset Information

Inter-hospital comparison of working time allocation among internal medicine residents using time-motion observations: an innovative benchmarking tool.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The vast majority of residents' working time is spent away from patients. In hospital practice, many factors may influence the resident's working day structure.Using an innovative method, we aimed to compare working time allocation among internal medicine residents using time-motion observations. The first study goal was to describe how the method could be used for inter-hospital comparison. The secondary goal was to learn about specific differences in the resident's working day structure in university and non-university hospital settings.

Design

Two separate time-motion studies. Trained peer-observers followed the residents during weekday day shifts with a tablet, able to record 22 different activities and corresponding context (with patient, phone, colleague or computer).

Setting

Internal medicine residencies at a university (May-July 2015) and a non-university (September-October 2016) community hospital.

Participants

28 residents (mean age: 29 years, average postgraduate training: 30 months) at university hospital, 21 residents (mean age: 30 years, average postgraduate training: 17 months) at non-university hospital.

Outcomes

Time spent with patients and time dedicated to activities directly related to patients; description of main differences of time allocation between hospitals.

Results

Cumulatively 1051 hours of observation (566 (university hospital)+486 (non-university hospital)) and 92 day shifts (49+43) were evaluated. Daily working time was 11.5 versus 11.3 hours. A median daily period of 195 min (IQR 179-211, 27.9%) and 116 min (IQR 98-134, 17.2%) (p<0.001) was dedicated to direct patient care, respectively.

Conclusions

We successfully identified differences potentially related to each hospital structure and organisation. Inter-hospital comparisons could help set up interventions aiming to improve workday structure and experience of residents.

SUBMITTER: Frey SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7044966 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe United States spends more than $12 billion annually on graduate medical education. Understanding how residents balance patient care and educational activities may provide insights into how the modern physician workforce is being trained.ObjectiveTo describe how first-year internal medicine residents (interns) allocate time while working on general medicine inpatient services.Design, setting, and participantsDirect observational secondary analysis, including 6 US university-affiliated and community-based internal medicine programs in the mid-Atlantic region, of the Comparative Effectiveness of Models Optimizing Patient Safety and Resident Education (iCOMPARE) trial, a cluster-randomized trial comparing different duty-hour policies. A total of 194 weekday shifts were observed and time motion data were collected, sampled by daytime, nighttime, and call shifts in proportion to the distribution of shifts within each program from March 10 through May 31, 2016. Data were analyzed from June 1, 2016, through January 5, 2019.Main outcomes and measuresMean time spent in direct and indirect patient care, education, rounds, handoffs, and miscellaneous activities within a 24-hour period and in each of four 6-hour periods (morning, afternoon, evening, and night). Time spent multitasking, simultaneously engaged in combinations of direct patient care, indirect patient care, or education, and in subcategories of indirect patient care were tracked.ResultsA total of 80 interns (55% men; mean [SD] age, 28.7 [2.3] years) were observed across 194 shifts, totaling 2173 hours. A mean (SD) of 15.9 (0.7) hours of a 24-hour period (66%) was spent in indirect patient care, mostly interactions with the patient's medical record or documentation (mean [SD], 10.3 [0.7] hours; 43%). A mean (SD) of 3.0 (0.1) hours was spent in direct patient care (13%) and 1.8 (0.3) hours in education (7%). This pattern was consistent across the 4 periods of the day. Direct patient care and education frequently occurred when interns were performing indirect patient care. Multitasking with 2 or more indirect patient care activities occurred for a mean (SD) of 3.8 (0.4) hours (16%) of the day.Conclusions and relevanceThis study's findings suggest that within these US teaching programs, interns spend more time participating in indirect patient care than interacting with patients or in dedicated educational activities. These findings provide an essential baseline measure for future efforts designed to improve the workday structure and experience of internal medicine trainees, without making a judgment on the current allocation of time.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02274818.

Project description:BackgroundCommunity health workers (CHWs) are essential field-based personnel and increasingly used to deliver priority interventions to achieve universal health coverage. Existing literature allude to the potential for detrimental effects of multi-tasking CHWs. This study objective was to assess the impact of integrating cervical cancer screening and prevention therapy (CCSPT) with family planning (FP) on time utilization among CHWs.MethodsA time and motion study was conducted in 7 health facilities in Malawi. Data was collected at baseline between October-July 2019, and 12 months after CCSPT implementation between July and August 2021. CHWs trained to deliver CCSPT were continuously observed in real time while their activities were timed by independent observers. We used paired sample t-test to assess pre-post differences in average hours CHWs spent on the following key activities, before and after CCSPT implementation: clinical and preventive care; administration; FP; and non-work-related tasks. Regression models were used to ascertain impact of CCSPT on average durations CHWs spent on key activities.ResultsThirty-seven (n = 37) CHWs were observed. Their mean age and years of experience were 42 and 17, respectively. Overall, CHWs were observed for 323 hours (inter quartile range: 2.8-5.5). Compared with the period before CCSPT, the proportion of hours CHWs spent on clinical and preventive care, administration and non-work-related activities were reduced by 13.7, 8.7 and 34.6%, respectively. CHWs spent 75% more time on FP services after CCSPT integration relative to the period before CCSPT. The provision of CCSPT resulted in less time that CHWs devoted towards clinical and preventive care but this reduction was not significant. Following CCPST, CHWs spent significantly few hours on non-work-related activities.ConclusionIntroduction of CCSPT was not very detrimental to pre-existing community services. CHWs managed their time ensuring additional efforts required for CCSPT were not at the expense of essential activities. The programming and policy implications are that multi-tasking CHWs with CCSPT will not have substantial opportunity costs.