Resident Duty-Hour Cuts Said to Impair Surgical Education, Safety

Nov. 8, 2009— -- Limiting surgical residents' work hours has compromised both surgical education and patient safety, according to an analysis concluding that an 80-hour work week isn't enough.

The maximum 80-work week imposed in the U.S. for residents is too little to provide mastery in surgery, Dr. Gretchen Purcell Jackson and Dr. John L. Tarpley, both of Vanderbilt Children's Hospital in Nashville, Tenn., wrote in online in the British Medical Journal.

Although the cap on working hours was designed to enhance patient safety by keeping exhausted residents away from operating tables and other aspects of patient care, rates of surgical complications and reinterventions actually climbed after the rules were imposed, they said.

Jackson and Tarpley recommended more flexibility in duty-hour limits for surgical residents in particular.

"Surgical disciplines are unique in that surgeons must not only acquire medical knowledge but also develop the manual dexterity and, sometimes, the strength and endurance to perform procedures," they said. "There probably isn't a shortcut for learning surgery."

The 80-hour week limitation in the United States regulations, instituted in 2003 across medical disciplines, is already much longer than 48-hour limit imposed by the European Working Time Directive for trainees in 2009 and the 37-hour week instituted by Denmark.

But even the 80-hour U.S. limit -- twice as long as the standard work week in most industries -- has been met by opposition from groups including the American College of Surgeons who say it's not tough enough.

The adverse effects on healthcare are already serious, but are likely to worsen, according to an accompanying editorial by Dr. Roy Pounder of the University of London.

"We know that many countries are not complying" with the European directive, he wrote, citing Greek and Irish court cases, instances of moonlighting, and "allegedly fraudulent work returns" in other areas.

Hour restrictions have made residents happier in the short term but shortchanged their future in medicine, Jackson and Tarpley argued.