ACGME Duty Hour Requirements: Perceptions and Impact on Resident Training and Patient Care.

Orthopaedic Advances

ACGME Duty Hour Requirements: Perceptions and Impact on Resident Training and Patient Care Abstract William N. Levine, MD Robert C. Spang III, MD

In 2003, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) created national guidelines for resident work hours to promote safe care and high-quality learning. However, some reports suggested that the 2003 rules did not reduce resident fatigue or improve patient care. Since July 2011, further restrictions have been in effect. The changes have been the source of much controversy regarding their impact on resident education and patient safety. We reviewed existing literature on the effects of the new and old rules, with a focus on the field of orthopaedics. In addition, we conducted a national survey of orthopaedic residents and residency directors to assess the general opinions of the orthopaedic community. Overall, only 19.7% of all respondents were satisfied with the new 2011 regulations, whereas 58.9% believe the 80-hour work week averaged over 4 weeks is appropriate. The results will inform discussions and decisions related to changing residency education in the future.

I

From Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY. Dr. Levine or an immediate family member serves as an unpaid consultant to Zimmer and serves as a board member, owner, officer, or committee member of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery and the American Orthopaedic Association. Dr. Spang or an immediate family member has stock or stock options held in Alnylam Pharmaceuticals. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2014;22: 535-544 http://dx.doi.org/10.5435/ JAAOS-22-09-535 Copyright 2014 by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.

September 2014, Vol 22, No 9

n 2003, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) established national duty hour restrictions for all residency and fellowship programs they accredit. These included limiting work hours for residents to 80 hours per week averaged over a 4-week period, with a maximum work shift length of 24 hours and at least 10 hours off between shifts. These changes were intended to promote safe care and high-quality learning at teaching institutions.1 The restrictions came about as a result of many years of debate on the effects of physician sleep deprivation on patient safety2 and have been a source of much controversy. However, some reports suggested that the 2003 rules did not reduce resident fatigue.3,4 More importantly, studies were unable to show an improvement in patient care.5,6 Effective July 1, 2011, the ACGME implemented further

restrictions, which included limiting intern shift length to 16 hours and limiting night float to no more than six consecutive nights1 (Table 1).

National Orthopaedics Survey With the 2011 rules having now been in effect, we believed it was an opportune time to comprehensively assess existing literature on work hour rules as well as the various perspectives of the orthopaedic community. We thus conducted a national survey of US orthopaedic residents and residency program directors regarding the 2003 and 2011 ACGME duty hour regulations. Our aim was to assess opinions of the 2003 and 2011 rule changes and perceptions of their impact on three areas: resident education, quality of life, and patient care.

535

Copyright Ó the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

ACGME Duty Hour Requirements

Table 1 Summary of 2003 and 2011 ACGME Requirements ACGME Standards Rule

2003

2011

Supervision

Adequate supervision required for all residents

Maximum hours of work per week

80 h, averaged over 4 wk (internal moonlighting included) 30 h (no new patients accepted after 24 h, 6 additional h for transitional/ educational activities)

PGY-1 residents must have direct supervision from an upper-level resident or an attending who is on site and immediately available to provide assistance at all times. 80 h per week, averaged over 4 wk (all moonlighting included) PGY-1: 16 h PGY-2 and up: 28 h (no new patients after 24 h, 4 h for transitional/ educational activities) Must have 8 h, should have 10 h; must have at least 14 h after 24 h of in-house duty 1 day free every 7 d, averaged over 4 wk (without at-home call assigned) Every third night, no averaging

Maximum length of duty period

Minimum time off between duty periods

10 h

Mandatory time free of duty

1 d free every 7 d, averaged over 4 wk

Maximum in-house on-call frequency At-home call

Every third night, on average

Maximum frequency of in-house night float

Time spent in hospital while on at-home call counts toward 80-h wk N/A

Every third night, no averaging Not more than 6 consecutive nights of night float

ACGME = Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, N/A = not applicable, PGY = postgraduate year

Table 2 Survey Response Rates Respondents Residents Interns Junior residents (PGY2-PGY3) Senior residents (PGY4-PGY5) Program Directors

No. Invited

No. Responded

Response Rate (%)

3,488 — —

914 175 342

26.2 — —

—

397

—

154

75

48.7

PGY = postgraduate year

Survey Methods A 41-item Likert-scale survey created through SurveyMonkey was approved by the American Orthopaedic Association and distributed via email link to membership as well as to all residency program directors and program coordinators for whom email addresses

536

could be obtained and forwarded to residents. Responses were collected from April to July 2012. In all, 26.2% of residents (914) and 48.7% of residency directors (75) completed the survey (Table 2). Statistical analysis was performed with the SPSS Statistics software. We

used the standard error of proportions to calculate two-sided confidence levels (CIs) with an a level of 0.05 (Table 3). Responses were collapsed into three categories to better portray the overall level of disagreement, neutrality, or agreement. We then performed difference of proportions tests to investigate differences of opinion between residency directors versus residents (Table 4). Finally, the mean responses of residency directors, senior residents, junior residents, and interns were calculated to assess opinions across the various levels of training (Figures 1 and 2).

Resident Fatigue Much of the impetus for rule changes stems from the debate regarding the effects of physician sleep deprivation on performance. One study found that post-call performance on simulated driving tasks during a heavy call

Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons


William N. Levine, MD, and Robert C. Spang III, MD

rotation is comparable to impairment associated with a 0.04% to 0.05% blood alcohol concentration during a light call rotation and raised concerns that residents may not be able to judge their level of impairment.2 At one institution, fatigue was prevalent and pervasive among studied orthopaedic residents.7 Residents were impaired (correlating with a blood alcohol level of 0.08%) during 27% of their time awake. However, another study found that sleep-deprived residents were able to learn new surgical tasks proficiently despite an increase in sleepiness.8

Impact of Work-hour Rules on Fatigue Although there may be negative consequences to fatigue, reports suggest the ACGME rules have not successfully reduced resident fatigue. One study reported in Pediatrics in 2008 found that total hours of work and sleep did not change after implementation of the 2003 duty hour standards.3 A look at factors contributing to fatigue concluded that simply decreasing the number of duty hours may not appreciably reduce intern fatigue.4 With respect to the new 2011 rules, our recent orthopaedic survey results show that while 52.6% of all respondents thought that the new 2011 rules improve resident quality of life, only 34.8% of respondents felt that residents are more rested (Table 3). One possible explanation could be that the 16-hour limit has decreased time off between shifts, as was found to occur in a preimplementation pilot study.9 Alternatively, incomplete compliance may play a role. Although our subjective survey study was limited in its ability to ascertain compliance, more than a third of responding orthopaedic interns (35.4% [95% CI, 28.3% to 42.6%]) knowingly underreported work hours within 1 month before survey completion to comply with regulations (Table 5). September 2014, Vol 22, No 9

Patient Care Unfortunately, it has not been shown that work hour rules have had a positive impact on the quality and safety of patient care. A pre-implementation study showed that interns made substantially more serious medical errors when they worked frequent shifts of 24 hours or more than when they worked shorter shifts.10 Observational studies since implementation of regulations show no significant relative changes in mortality6 and no difference in mortality among surgical patients.5 Existing evidence suggests that reduced resident shift length does not improve surgical outcomes.11 Our respondents strongly felt the new rule changes in 2011 have not improved the surgical experience (71.9% [95% CI, 69.1% to 74.7%]). Although existing observational studies are limited, researchers have begun planning the prospective randomized iCOMPARE trial, which will investigate new models of care to mitigate intern fatigue.12

Views of the Orthopaedic Community The views of the orthopaedic community regarding duty hour standards have been previously studied. A national orthopaedics survey conducted in early 2011, before implementation of the new 2011 rules, found that residents and program directors agreed that the further reductions in duty hours may be detrimental to resident education and patient care.13 This sentiment was shared by residents in all medical specialties in 201014 and persisted in 2012 after the new limits had been put into effect.15

Recent Survey Results New 2011 Rules Overall, only 19.7% of all respondents (both residency directors and residents)

were satisfied with the new 2011 duty hour regulations (Table 3). Just 8.4% believed limiting interns to 16 hours per day is an improvement, whereas most (51.1%) considered limiting night duty to be an improvement. Only 10.8% thought that the new 2011 rules improve resident education, and 17.0% thought the new rules improve patient care. Most respondents (65.5%) felt resident supervision has been adequate. Although 80.1% believed their program consistently adheres to the new rule limiting interns to 16 hours per day, 29.6% of residents said they knowingly underreported actual work hours during the previous month to comply with the new 2011 rules (Table 5). Opinions of the new 2011 rules were further subdivided into the groups interns, junior residents, senior residents, and residency directors with mean responses displayed graphically (Figure 1), which reveals a trend of younger trainees viewing the new rules more favorably.

2003 Rules Regarding the old rules, most (58.9%) believed the 80-hour work week standard, averaged over 4 weeks, is appropriate. A total of 39.2% felt that the 80-hour week lessens the educational experience, whereas 35.7% felt it did not. More respondents (38.8%) felt that the 80-hour week improves patient safety, with 27.3% disagreeing. A total of 77.5% say their program consistently adheres to the 80-hour rule.

Continuity of Care One potential explanation to reconcile the lack of data showing improved patient outcomes after work-hour restrictions is that continuity of care may have suffered. Most respondents thought that the resultant increased patient handoffs are detrimental to patient safety (75.5% [95% CI, 72.9% to 78.2%]) and that continuity of care has been negatively impacted (70.1%

537



Table 3 Overall Responses by Percentiles Survey Statement Resident Education The new ACGME duty hour rules implemented on July 1st, 2011 improve resident education. Limiting interns to 16 h per day positively impacts their education and training. Limiting night duty to no more than six consecutive nights improves resident education. Since the changes implemented on July 1st, 2011, the level of resident supervision in my program has been adequate. The new rules implemented on July 1st, 2011 have improved resident operative experience. The 80-h resident work week lessens the educational experience. The 80-h resident work week will prepare residents for life as an attending in practice. Patient Care The new ACGME duty hour rules implemented on July 1st, 2011 improve patient safety. Limiting interns to 16 h per day improves patient safety. The increased patient handoffs are detrimental to patient safety and quality of care. Limiting night duty to no more than six consecutive nights improves patient safety.

Agree (%) (95% CI)

Neutral (%)

Disagree (%)

10.8 (8.9-12.8)

22.9 (20.2-25.5)

66.3 (63.4-69.3)

9.9 (8.0-11.8)

10.6 (8.7-12.5)

79.5 (77.0-82.0)

52.8 (49.7-55.9)

27.6 (24.8-30.4)

19.6 (17.1-22.1)

65.5 (62.6-68.5)

27.4 (24.6-30.2)

7.1 (5.5-8.7)

5.2 (3.8-6.5)

23.0 (20.2-25.6)

71.9 (69.1-74.7)

39.2 (36.2-42.3)

24.9 (22.2-27.6)

35.7 (32.9-38.9)

25.3 (22.6-28.0)

25.9 (23.2-28.6)

48.8 (45.7-52.0)

17.0 (14.6-19.3)

28.8 (26.0-31.6)

54.2 (51.1-57.3)

12.2 (10.2-14.3)

22.4 (19.8-25.0)

65.4 (62.5-68.4)

75.5 (72.9-78.2)

18.3 (15.9-20.7)

6.2 (4.7-7.7)

43.7 (40.6-46.8)

39.3 (36.3-42.4)

17.0 (14.6-19.3) (continued)

ACGME = Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, CI = confidence interval

[95% CI, 67.2% to 72.9%]). It will be important to see if these concerns are borne out in future outcome studies.

Resident Education The large majority (81.3% [95% CI, 72.3% to 90.4%]) of residency

538

director respondents to our survey do not feel the new 2011 rules improve resident education, and most residents (65.1% [95% CI, 62.0% to 68.2%]) agree. Perceptions toward the limitation of night float to 6 consecutive nights are more favorable. Most respondents (52.8% ([95% CI, 49.7% to 55.9%])

thought that this improves resident education, and more thought it improves patient safety (43.7% ([95% CI, 40.6% to 46.8%]) than did not (17.0% ([95% CI, 14.6% to 19.3%]). This may be partially explained by the recent finding that night-float residents were more impaired, with an increased risk of




Table 3 (continued ) Survey Statement The 80-duty hour week improves patient safety Continuity of care for patients has been negatively impacted. Overall quality of patient care has improved due to work-duty hour restrictions. Resident Quality of Life The new ACGME duty hour rules implemented on July 1st, 2011 improve resident quality of life. The 80-h resident work week improves resident quality of life. Residents are more rested since the enactment of the new work-hour rules. Overall Overall, limiting interns to 16 working hours per day is an improvement. Limiting night duty to no more than six consecutive nights is an improvement. The 80-h resident work week standard is appropriate. Overall, I am satisfied with the new ACGME duty hour regulations. Adherence My residency program consistently adheres to the 80-h resident work week rule. My residency program consistently adheres to the new rule limiting interns to a maximum of 16 work hours per day.

Agree (%) (95% CI)

Neutral (%)

Disagree (%)

38.8 (35.8-41.9)

33.9 (30.9-36.8)

27.3 (24.5-30.1)

70.1 (67.2-72.9)

18.5 (16.1-20.9)

11.4 (9.4-13.4)

15.6 (13.3-17.8)

39.2 (36.2-42.3)

45.2 (42.1-48.3)

52.6 (49.5-55.7)

25.3 (22.6-28.0)

22.1 (19.6-24.7)

74.7 (72.0-77.4)

17.2 (14.8-19.5)

8.1 (6.4-9.8)

34.8 (31.8-37.8)

30.5 (27.7-33.4)

34.7 (31.7-37.7)

8.4 (6.7-10.1)

15.3 (13.0-17.5)

76.3 (73.7-79.0)

51.1 (47.9-54.2)

30.4 (27.6-33.3)

18.5 (16.1-20.9)

58.9 (55.8-61.9)

23.6 (20.9-26.2)

17.6 (15.2-20.0)

19.7 (17.2-22.2)

27.1 (24.3-29.9)

53.2 (50.1-56.3)

77.5 (74.8-80.1)

10.5 (8.6-12.4)

10.5 (8.6-12.4)

80.1 (77.6-82.6)

8.3 (6.6-10.0)

5.16 (3.8-6.5)

ACGME = Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, CI = confidence interval

medical error.7 Night float might also be less educationally beneficial than time spent in the hospital during the day. General surgery ABSITE (American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination) scores improved significantly after the reform, whereas surgical experience and overall surgical case volume were unaffected.16-18 September 2014, Vol 22, No 9

Supervision In addition to the aforementioned changes, the new 2011 ACGME rules also emphasized improved resident supervision and faculty oversight. Now first-year residents must have immediate access to in-house supervision.1 Of

those surveyed 65.5% (95% CI, 62.6% to 68.5%) felt the level of resident supervision in their program has been adequate since the rule changes, with just 7.1% (95% CI, 5.5% to 8.7%) in disagreement. A recent survey of all specialties showed most thought supervision has not changed since the new 2011 rules were implemented.15

539



Table 4 Residenta and Program Director Responses by Percentiles

Survey Statement Resident Education The new ACGME duty hour rules implemented on July 1st, 2011 improve resident education. Limiting interns to 16 h per day positively impacts their education and training. Limiting night duty to no more than six consecutive nights improves resident education. Since the changes implemented on July 1st, 2011, the level of resident supervision in my program has been adequate. The new rules implemented on July 1st, 2011 have improved resident operative experience. The 80-h resident work week lessens the educational experience. The 80-h resident work week will prepare residents for life as an attending in practice. Patient Care The new ACGME duty hour rules implemented on July 1st, 2011 improve patient safety. Limiting interns to 16 h per day improves patient safety. The increased patient handoffs are detrimental to patient safety and quality of care.

Respondents

Agree (%) (95% CI)

Neutral (%)

Disagree (%)

Difference of Proportion Agreeing

Residents Program Directors

11.6 (9.5-13.7) 1.3 (0.0-4.0)

23.3 (20.6-26.1) 65.1 (62.0-68.2) 17.3 (8.6-26.1) 81.3 (72.3-90.4)

P , 0.001


9.6 (7.7-11.5) 13.3 (5.5-21.2)

11.2 (9.1-13.2) 4.0 (0.0-8.5)

79.2 (76.6-81.9) 82.7 (73.9-91.4)

P = 0.019


53.1 (49.8-56.3) 27.8 (24.9-30.7) 19.2 (16.6-21.7) 49.3 (37.8-60.9) 25.3 (15.3-35.4) 25.3 (15.3-35.4)

P = 0.004


65.7 (61.6-67.8) 28.1 (25.2-31.0) 7.2 (5.5-8.9) 76.0 (66.1-85.9) 18.7 (9.6-27.7) 5.3 (0.1-10.5)

P = 0.04


5.5 (4.0-7.0) 1.3 (0.0-4.0)

23.6 (20.9-26.4) 70.9 (68.0-73.9) 14.7 (6.5-22.9) 74.0 (75.5-92.5)

P = 0.012


37.3 (34.2-40.5) 25.3 (22.5-28.1) 37.4 (34.3-40.6) 62.7 (51.5-73.9) 20.0 (10.7-29.3) 17.3 (8.6-26.1)

P , 0.001


27.0 (24.1-29.9) 27.2 (24.4-30.1) 45.7 (42.5-49.0) 4.0 (0.0-8.5) 9.3 (2.6-16.1) 86.7 (78.8-94.5)

P , 0.001


18.1 (15.6-20.6) 29.9 (26.9-32.8) 52.1 (48.8-55.3) 4.0 (0.0-8.5) 16.0 (7.5-24.5) 80.0 (70.7-89.3)

P , 0.001


12.8 (10.6-15.0) 22.9 (20.1-25.6) 64.3 (61.2-67.4) 5.3 (0.1-10.5) 16.0 (7.5-24.5) 78.7 (69.2-88.2)

P = 0.108


74.2 (71.3-77.0) 19.4 (16.8-21.9) 6.5 (4.9-8.1) 92.0 (85.7-98.3) 5.3 (0.1-10.5) 2.7 (0.0-6.4)

P = 0.528

(continued) a

Intern, junior, and senior residents ACGME = Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, CI = confidence interval

540




Table 4 (continued )

Survey Statement Limiting night duty to no more than six consecutive nights improves patient safety. The 80-duty hour week improves patient safety Continuity of care for patients has been negatively impacted. Overall quality of patient care has improved due to work-duty hour restrictions. Resident Quality of Life The new ACGME duty hour rules implemented on July 1st, 2011 improve resident quality of life. The 80-h resident work week improves resident quality of life. Residents are more rested since the enactment of the new work-hour rules. Overall Overall, limiting interns to 16 working hours per day is an improvement. Limiting night duty to no more than six consecutive nights is an improvement. The 80-h resident work week standard is appropriate. Overall, I am satisfied with the new ACGME duty hour regulations. Adherence My residency program consistently adheres to the 80-h resident work week rule. My residency program consistently adheres to the new rule limiting interns to a maximum of 16 work hours per day.

Respondents

Agree (%) (95% CI)

Neutral (%)

Disagree (%)

Difference of Proportion Agreeing


44.4 (41.2-47.7) 39.5 (36.3-42.7) 16.1 (13.7-18.5) 34.7 (23.6-45.7) 37.3 (26.1-48.5) 28.0 (17.6-38.4)

P , 0.001

Residents Program Directors Residents Program Directors

41.0 (37.8-44.2) 12.0 (4.5-19.5) 68.4 (65.4-71.4) 90.7 (83.9-97.4)

23.9 (21.1-26.6) 69.3 (58.7-80.0) 12.0 (9.9-14.2) 4.0 (0.0-8.5)

P , 0.001


16.5 (14.1-18.9) 41.1 (37.9-44.3) 42.3 (39.1-45.6) 4.0 (0.0-8.5) 16.0 (7.5-24.5) 80.0 (70.7-89.3)

P , 0.001


51.8 (48.5-55.0) 25.8 (23.0-28.7) 22.4 (19.7-25.1) 62.7 (51.5-73.9) 18.7 (9.6-27.7) 18.7 (9.6-27.7)

P = 0.02


74.7 (71.9-77.6) 17.4 (14.9-19.9) 7.9 (6.1-9.6) 74.7 (64.6-84.7) 14.7 (6.5-22.9) 10.7 (3.5-17.8)

P = 0.001


35.0 (31.9-38.1) 32.1 (29.0-35.1) 32.9 (29.9-36.0) 32.0 (21.2-42.8) 12.0 (4.5-19.5) 56.0 (44.5-67.5)

P = 0.115


8.6 (6.8-10.5) 5.3 (0.1-10.5)

15.9 (13.5-18.2) 75.5 (72.7-78.3) 8.0 (1.7-14.3) 86.7 (78.8-94.5)

P = 0.984


51.3 (48.1-54.6) 30.3 (27.3-33.3) 18.4 (15.9-20.9) 48.0 (36.4-59.6) 32.0 (21.2-42.8) 20.0 (10.7-29.3)

P , 0.001


60.9 (57.8-64.1) 23.9 (21.1-26.6) 15.2 (12.9-17.5) 33.3 (22.4-44.3) 20.0 (10.7-29.3) 46.7 (35.1-58.2)

P , 0.001


20.5 (17.8-23.1) 28.6 (25.6-31.5) 51.0 (47.7-54.2) 10.7 (3.5-17.8) 9.3 (2.6-16.1) 80.0 (70.7-89.3)

P , 0.001


76.0 (73.3-78.8) 11.2 (9.1-13.2) 94.7 (89.5-99.9) 2.7 (0.0-6.4)

11.3 (9.2-13.3) 1.3 (0.0-4.0)

P = 0.830


79.1 (76.5-81.7) 9.0 (7.1-10.8) 92.0 (85.7-98.3) 0.0

5.25 (3.8-6.7) 4.0 (0.0-8.5)

P , 0.001

35.1 (32.0-38.2) 18.7 (9.6-27.7) 19.6 (17.0-22.2) 5.3 (0.1-10.5)

P = 0.084

a Intern, junior, and senior residents ACGME = Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, CI = confidence interval

September 2014, Vol 22, No 9

541



Figure 1

Graph illustrating mean response values for questions related to the new 2011 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) rules, according to level of training. 1 = strongly disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 = neutral; 4 = agree; 5 = strongly agree.

Differences of Opinion An additional goal of our survey was to assess views on the 80-hour average work week and to determine if differences of opinion exist between individuals at different levels of training. Whereas there was general agreement in opposition to the new 2011 rules, attitudes toward the 80-hour work week differed significantly. A total of 60.9% (95% CI, 57.8% to 64.1%) of residents but just 33.3% (95% CI, 22.4% to 44.3%) of program directors think the 80-hour work week is appropriate (P , 0.001). This dichotomy of opinion with residents viewing the 80-hour week more favorably is

542

consistent with the findings of past orthopaedic surveys.13,19 Interestingly, only 4% (95% CI, zero to 8.5%) of program directors and 27% (95% CI, 24.1% to 29.9%) of residents believe an 80-hour week will prepare residents for life as an attending in practice. When asked what is a reasonable amount of hours each week for residents to work, 88.3% of responses were .71 hours per week and 44.4% were .81 hours per week.

Work Ethic Although the work-hour discussions often focus on the more immediate impact on patient safety and resident

training, much of the concern lies in the potential long-term consequences of current policies. In their comments, many program directors worry that the regulations promote a shift-worker mentality rather than engendering a sense of altruistic responsibility and patient ownership. A total of 70.3% (95% CI, 59.6% to 80.9%) of program directors felt that the resident work ethic has deteriorated. Although generational differences may exist, resistance to the rules was not limited to directors. In their comments, many residents lamented facing the decision to leave a sick patient or forego an educational case to avoid a work-rules violation. This concern had been




Figure 2

Graph illustrating mean response values for questions related to the 80-hour work week (averaged over 4 weeks), according to level of training. 1 = strongly disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 = neutral; 4 = agree; 5 = strongly agree. Trend inverted in the first question due to the word “lessens.”

previously expressed by the ACGME1 and by US orthopaedic surgeons.13 Comments regarding the new 2011 rule limiting interns to 16 hours are generally consistent with the results of the survey. Although 29.7% of residency directors reported that they are currently working .80 hours per week on average as an attending, they noted that they cannot routinely “hand off” patients or pass on responsibility. Comments emphasized the importance of learning to work safely through fatigue when necessary. They noted the dangers of delayed preparedness for roles as a senior resident and the potential shock of the increased personal responsibility as an attending. September 2014, Vol 22, No 9

Table 5 Compliance I have knowingly under-reported actual work hours during the last month to comply with the new rules.

Agree (95% CI)

Interns Junior Residents Senior Residents Overall

35.4 (28.3-42.6) 33.0 (28.0-38.1) 24.0 (19.8-28.2) 29.6 (26.6-32.5)

This may help explain why the attitudes of senior residents more closely resemble that of attendings and why most think preparedness for life as an attending is suffering. Comments also echoed sentiments that a one-size-fits-

all approach for all specialties may not be appropriate.17 Ultimately, decreased competency of orthopaedic surgeons because of reduced work-hours need not necessarily become a reality. Many

543



commented that 80 hours per week should in theory provide ample time to educate capable residents, but the current hospital system often relies on residents to perform valuable tasks that are of minimal educational value. Hiring additional help to cover these lower-yield learning activities can increase the efficiency of workhours, but at substantial cost.20,21

satisfied with the new 2011 regulations. Most residents think that the 80-hour resident work week standard, averaged over 4 weeks, is appropriate, but program directors generally do not. These results will assist leaders representing the orthopaedic surgery community in working with the ACGME and will inform decisions related to curriculum planning and changing residency education in the future.

8. Tomasko JM, Pauli EM, Kunselman AR, Haluck RS: Sleep deprivation increases cognitive workload during simulated surgical tasks. Am J Surg 2012;203(1):37-43. 9. McCoy CP, Halvorsen AJ, Loftus CG, McDonald FS, Oxentenko AS: Effect of 16hour duty periods on patient care and resident education. Mayo Clin Proc 2011; 86(3):192-196. 10. Landrigan CP, Rothschild JM, Cronin JW, et al: Effect of reducing interns’ work hours on serious medical errors in intensive care units. N Engl J Med 2004;351(18):1838-1848. 11.

Study Limitations References There are important inherent limitations to such a survey study that deserve acknowledgment. There is the potential for sampling bias with response rates of 26.2% of residents and 48.7% of directors, which can skew results and make extrapolations regarding the entire orthopaedic population inaccurate. Another limitation is the inability to definitively investigate outcomes. Additional studies are needed to determine whether the expressed opinions regarding the impact of work-hour regulations reflect actual outcomes.

Summary Resident work-hour restrictions implemented by the ACGME continue to be a prevalent and controversial topic of debate in the medical community. Although evidence suggests that fatigue negatively impacts performance, it is unclear whether existing reforms have decreased resident fatigue. Studies have suggested that the resident surgical experience has not diminished and that the rules positively impact resident education, yet fail to definitely show that the 2003 and 2011 rules have improved patient outcomes. The general opinion of the surveyed US orthopaedic surgery community is that the new duty hour rules implemented in July 2011 do not succeed in their stated goals of improving education or patient care. Most are not

544

Evidence-based Medicine: Levels of evidence are described in the table of contents. In this article, reference 10 is a level I study. References 2, 3, 7, and 8 are level II studies. References 4-6, 9, 11, and 13-20 are level III studies.

Yaghoubian A, Kaji AH, Ishaque B, et al: Acute care surgery performed by sleep deprived residents: are outcomes affected? J Surg Res 2010;163(2):192-196.

12. iCOMPARE: Comparative Effectiveness of Models Optimizing Patient Safety and Resident Education. http://www.jhcct.org/ icompare/default.asp. Accessed July 7, 2014. 13.

Mir HR, Cannada LK, Murray JN, Black KP, Wolf JM: Orthopaedic resident and program director opinions of resident duty hours: a national survey. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011;93(23):e1421-e1429.

References printed in bold type are those published within the past 5 years.

14.

Drolet BC, Spalluto LB, Fischer SA: Residents’ perspectives on ACGME regulation of supervision and duty hours: A national survey. N Engl J Med 2010;363(23):e34.

1. Nasca TJ, Day SH, Amis ES Jr; ACGME Duty Hour Task Force: The new recommendations on duty hours from the ACGME Task Force. N Engl J Med 2010; 363(2):e3.

15.

Drolet BC, Christopher DA, Fischer SA: Residents’ response to duty-hour regulations: A follow-up national survey. N Engl J Med 2012;366(24):e35.

2. Arnedt JT, Owens J, Crouch M, Stahl J, Carskadon MA: Neurobehavioral performance of residents after heavy night call vs after alcohol ingestion. JAMA 2005; 294(9):1025-1033. 3. Landrigan CP, Fahrenkopf AM, Lewin D, et al: Effects of the accreditation council for graduate medical education duty hour limits on sleep, work hours, and safety. Pediatrics 2008;122(2):250-258. 4. Friesen LD, Vidyarthi AR, Baron RB, Katz PP: Factors associated with intern fatigue. J Gen Intern Med 2008;23(12):1981-1986. 5. Volpp KG, Rosen AK, Rosenbaum PR, et al: Mortality among patients in VA hospitals in the first 2 years following ACGME resident duty hour reform. JAMA 2007;298(9):984-992. 6. Volpp KG, Rosen AK, Rosenbaum PR, et al: Mortality among hospitalized Medicare beneficiaries in the first 2 years following ACGME resident duty hour reform. JAMA 2007;298(9):975-983. 7. McCormick F, Kadzielski J, Landrigan CP, Evans B, Herndon JH, Rubash HE: Surgeon fatigue: A prospective analysis of the incidence, risk, and intervals of predicted fatigue-related impairment in residents. Arch Surg 2012;147(5):430-435.

16. Durkin ET, McDonald R, Munoz A, Mahvi D: The impact of work hour restrictions on surgical resident education. J Surg Educ 2008;65(1):54-60. 17. Baskies MA, Ruchelsman DE, Capeci CM, Zuckerman JD, Egol KA: Operative experience in an orthopaedic surgery residency program: The effect of work-hour restrictions. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008;90 (4):924-927. 18. Pappas AJ, Teague DC: The impact of the accreditation council for graduate medical education work-hour regulations on the surgical experience of orthopaedic surgery residents. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007;89(4): 904-909. 19. Immerman I, Kubiak EN, Zuckerman JD: Resident work-hour rules: a survey of residents’ and program directors’ opinions and attitudes. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 2007;36(12):E172-E179. 20.

Kamath AF, Baldwin K, Meade LK, Powell AC, Mehta S: The increased financial burden of further proposed orthopaedic resident work-hour reductions. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011;93(7):e31.

21.

Nuckols TK, Escarce JJ: Cost implications of ACGME’s 2011 changes to resident duty hours and the training environment. J Gen Intern Med 2012;27(2):241-249.



Resident perceptions of the impact of duty hour restrictions on resident-attending interactions: an exploratory study.

Impact of 2011 resident duty hour requirements on neurology residency programs and departments.

Association of the 2011 ACGME resident duty hour reform with general surgery patient outcomes and with resident examination performance.

Re: Association of the 2011 ACGME resident duty hour reform with general surgery patient outcomes and with resident examination performance.

Investigating the Impact of the 2011 ACGME Resident Duty Hour Regulations on Surgical Residency Programs: The Program Director Perspective.

Increased Mortality Rates During Resident Handoff Periods and the Effect of ACGME Duty Hour Regulations.

Early impact of the 2011 ACGME duty hour regulations on surgical outcomes.

Changes to pediatric clerkships' nighttime structure after introduction of the 2011 ACGME resident duty hour standards.

A systematic review of the effects of resident duty hour restrictions in surgery: impact on resident wellness, training, and patient outcomes.

On Patient Safety: Have The ACGME Resident Work Hour Reforms Improved Patient Safety?

The Relationship Between ACGME Duty Hour Requirements and Performance on the American Board of Emergency Medicine Qualifying Examination.

Effects of the 2011 duty hour restrictions on resident education and learning from patient admissions.

Time to refine resident duty hour guidelines.

Disparate Perceptions of Resident Physicians, Faculty Physicians, and Program Directors on the 2011 ACGME Work Hour Regulations.

Patient Perceptions of Whom is Most Involved in Their Care with Successive Duty Hour Limits.

Association of the 2011 ACGME resident duty hour reforms with mortality and readmissions among hospitalized Medicare patients.

A qualitative assessment of internal medicine resident perceptions of graduate medical education following implementation of the 2011 ACGME duty hour standards.

Recent family medicine residency graduates' perceptions of resident duty hour restrictions.

Duty hour reforms and patient outcomes--reply.

Scheduling in the context of resident duty hour reform.

Resident duty-hour reform: moving beyond "change for change's sake".

The ACGME Duty Hour Standards and Board Certification Examination Performance Trends in Surgical Specialties.

Elimination of 24-hour continuous medical resident duty in Quebec.

Duty hour requirements: time for a new approach?