Association between patient care ownership and personal or environmental factors among medical trainees: a multicenter cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Patient care ownership (PCO) is crucial to enhancing accountability, clinical skills, and medical care quality among medical trainees. Despite its relevance, there is limited information on the association of personal or environmental factors with PCO, and thus, authors aimed to explore this association. METHODS: In 2021, the authors conducted a multicentered cross-sectional study in 25 hospitals across Japan. PCO was assessed by using the Japanese version of the PCO Scale (J-PCOS). To examine the association between personal (level of training, gender, and department) or environmental factors (hospital size, hospital type, medical care system, number of team members, number of patients receiving care, mean working hours per week, number of off-hour calls per month, and perceived level of the workplace as a learning environment) and PCO after adjusting for clustering within hospitals, the authors employed a linear mixed-effects model. RESULTS: The analysis included 401 trainees. After adjusting for clustering within hospitals, it was confirmed that the senior residents had significantly better J-PCOS total scores (adjusted mean difference: 8.64, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.18-11.09) than the junior residents and the perceived level of the workplace as a learning environment had a positive association with J-PCOS total scores (adjusted mean difference per point on a global rating of 0-10 points: 1.39, 95% CI: 0.88-1.90). Trainees who received calls after duty hours had significantly higher J-PCOS total scores than those who did not (adjusted mean difference: 2.51, 95% CI: 0.17-4.85). There was no clear trend in the association between working hours and PCO. CONCLUSIONS: Seniority and the perceived level of the workplace as a learning environment are associated with PCO. An approach that establishes a supportive learning environment and offers trainees a reasonable amount of autonomy may be beneficial in fostering PCO among trainees. The study findings will serve as a useful reference for designing an effective postgraduate clinical training program for PCO development.

Translating and validating a Japanese version of the Patient Care Ownership Scale: a multicenter cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Patient care ownership (PCO) is an essential component in medical professionalism and is crucial for delivering high-quality care. The 15-item PCO Scale (PCOS) is a validated questionnaire for quantifying PCO in residents; however, no corresponding tool for assessing PCO in Japan exists. This study aimed to develop a Japanese version of the PCOS (J-PCOS) and validate it among Japanese medical trainees. METHODS: We performed a multicenter cross-sectional survey to test the validity and reliability of the J-PCOS. The study sample was trainees of postgraduate years 1-5 in Japan. The participants completed the J-PCOS questionnaire. Construct validity was assessed through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Internal consistency reliability was examined by calculating Cronbach's alpha coefficients and inter-item correlations. RESULTS: During the survey period, 437 trainees at 48 hospitals completed the questionnaire. Exploratory factor analysis of the J-PCOS extracted four factors: assertiveness, sense of ownership, diligence, and being the "go-to" person. The second factor had not been identified in the original PCOS, which may be related to a unique cultural feature of Japan, namely, a historical code of personal conduct. Confirmatory factor analysis supported this four-factor model, revealing good model fit indices. The analysis results of Cronbach's alpha coefficients and inter-item correlations indicated adequate internal consistency reliability. CONCLUSIONS: We developed the J-PCOS and examined its validity and reliability. This tool can be used in studies on postgraduate medical education. Further studies should confirm its robustness and usefulness for improving PCO.

2011 ACGME Duty Hour Limits had No Association With Breast Reconstruction Complications.

BACKGROUND: In 2011, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) instituted further duty hour restrictions in response to concerns over long work hours and sleep deprivation in trainees and their effects on patient outcomes. The effect of duty hour restrictions on complications after breast reconstruction procedures has not been clarified. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis was designed. The National Inpatient Sample database was queried in the 2 y before and 2 y after the 2011 duty hour changes. Patients undergoing breast reconstruction, the most common elective admission diagnosis for plastic surgery patients, were selected for analysis. Patient groups were separated by teaching hospitals (THs) and nonteaching hospitals and by pre- and post-ACGME change periods. Surgical complication rates, length of stay, and procedures were analyzed using complex survey-weighted univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis, with additional sensitivity analysis applied. RESULTS: The number of procedures did not vary significantly in the period after duty hour restrictions in THs (n = 46,188, pre-ACGME versus n = 48,980, post-ACGME). Overall complication rates in teaching (9.54%, pre-ACGME versus 9.04%, post-ACGME; P = 0.561) and nonteaching hospitals (8.54%, pre-ACGME versus 7.70%, post-ACGME; P = 0.319) did not significantly change after the implementation of duty hour changes. On multivariate analysis, surgery performed in resident THs after duty hour changes was not associated with a significant change in overall (odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.77-1.37; P = 0.857) breast-specific complications (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.77-1.46; P = 0.731) or general complications (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.80-1.54; P = 0.541). CONCLUSIONS: Duty hour restrictions enacted in 2011 were not associated with postoperative complications after breast reconstruction.

Impact of duty hours on competency-related knowledge acquisition among community hospital residents.

Background: The effect of duty hour (DH) restrictions on postgraduate residents' acquisition of clinical competencies is unclear. We evaluated the relationship between DHs and competency-related knowledge acquisition using the General Medicine In-training Examination (GM-ITE). Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cross-sectional study of community hospital residents among 2019 GM-ITE examinees. Self-reported average DHs per week were classified into five DH categories and the competency domains were classified into four areas: symptomatology and clinical reasoning (CR), physical examination and clinical procedure (PP), medical interview and professionalism (MP), and disease knowledge (DK). The association between these scores and DHs was examined using random-intercept linear models with and without adjustment for confounding factors. Results: We included 4753 participants in the analyses. Of these, 31% were women, and 49.1% were in the postgraduate year (PGY) 2. Mean CR and MP scores were lower among residents in Category 1 (<50 h) than in residents in Category 3 (≥60 and <70 h; reference group). Mean DK scores were lower among residents in Categories 1 and 2 (≥50 and <60 h) than in the reference group. PGY-2 residents in Categories 1 and 2 had lower CR scores than those in Category 3; however, PGY-1 residents in Category 5 showed higher scores. Conclusions: The relationship between DHs and each competency area is not strictly linear. The acquisition of knowledge of physical examination and clinical procedures skills in particular may not be related to DHs.

Comparison of Canadian and Swiss Surgical Training Curricula: Moving on Toward Competency-Based Surgical Education.

OBJECTIVE: Quality of surgical training in the era of resident duty-hour restrictions (RDHR) is part of an ongoing debate. Most training elements are provided during surgical service. As exposure to surgical procedures is important but time-consuming, RDHR may affect quality of surgical training. Providing structured training elements may help to compensate for this shortcoming. DESIGN: This binational anonymous questionnaire-based study evaluates frequency, time, and structure of surgical training programs at 2 typical academic teaching hospitals with different RDHR. SETTING: Departments of Surgery of University of Basel (Basel, Switzerland) and the Queen's University (Kingston, Ontario, Canada). PARTICIPANTS: Surgical consultants and residents of the Queen's University Hospital (Kingston, Ontario, Canada) and the University Hospital Basel (Basel, Switzerland) were eligible for this study. RESULTS: Questionnaire response rate was 37% (105/284). Queen's residents work 80 hours per week, receiving 7 hours of formal training (8.8% of workweek). Basel residents work 60 hours per week, including 1 hour of formal training (1.7% of working time). Queen's faculty and residents rated their program as "structured" or "rather structured" in contrast to Basel faculty and residents who rated their programs as "neutral" in structure or "unstructured." Respondents identified specific structured training elements more frequently at Queen's than in Basel. Two-thirds of residents responded that they seek out additional surgical experiences through voluntary extra work. Basel participants articulated a stronger need for improvement of current surgical training. Although Basel residents and consultants in both institutions fear negative influence of RDHR on the training program, this was not the case in Queen's residents. CONCLUSIONS: Providing more structured surgical training elements may be advantageous in providing optimal-quality surgical education in an era of work-hour restrictions.

Worse outcomes for patients undergoing brain tumor and cerebrovascular procedures following the ACGME resident duty-hour restrictions.

OBJECT: On July 1, 2003, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) implemented duty-hour restrictions for resident physicians due to concerns for patient and resident safety. Though duty-hour restrictions have increased resident quality of life, studies have shown mixed results with respect to patient outcomes. In this study, the authors have evaluated the effect of duty-hour restrictions on morbidity, mortality, length of stay, and charges in patients who underwent brain tumor and cerebrovascular procedures. METHODS: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was used to evaluate the effect of duty-hour restrictions on complications, mortality, length of stay, and charges by comparing the pre-reform (2000-2002) and post-reform (2005-2008) periods. Outcomes were compared between nonteaching and teaching hospitals using a difference-in-differences (DID) method. RESULTS: A total of 90,648 patients were included in the analysis. The overall complication rate was 11.7%, with the rates not significantly differing between the pre- and post-duty hour eras (p = 0.26). Examination of hospital teaching status revealed that complication rates decreased in nonteaching hospitals (12.1% vs 10.4%, p = 0.0004) and remained stable in teaching institutions (11.8% vs 11.9%, p = 0.73) in the post-reform era. Multivariate analysis demonstrated a significantly higher complication risk in teaching institutions (OR 1.33 [95% CI 1.11-1.59], p = 0.0022), with no significant change in nonteaching hospitals (OR 1.11 [95% CI 0.91-1.37], p = 0.31). A DID analysis to compare the magnitude in change between teaching and nonteaching institutions revealed that teaching hospitals had a significantly greater increase in complications during the post-reform era than nonteaching hospitals (p = 0.040). The overall mortality rate was 3.0%, with a significant decrease occurring in the post-reform era in both nonteaching (5.0% vs 3.2%, p < 0.0001) and teaching (3.2% vs 2.3%, p < 0.0001) hospitals. DID analysis to compare the changes in mortality between groups did not reveal a significant difference (p = 0.40). The mean length of stay for all patients was 8.7 days, with hospital stay decreasing from 9.2 days to 8.3 days in the post-reform era (p < 0.0001). The DID analysis revealed a greater length of stay decrease in nonteaching hospitals than teaching institutions, which approached significance (p = 0.055). Patient charges significantly increased in the post-reform era for all patients, increasing from $70,900 to $96,100 (p < 0.0001). The DID analysis did not reveal a significant difference between the changes in charges between teaching and nonteaching hospitals (p = 0.17). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of duty-hour restrictions correlated with an increased risk of postoperative complications for patients undergoing brain tumor and cerebrovascular neurosurgical procedures. Duty-hour reform may therefore be associated with worse patient outcomes, contrary to its intended purpose. Due to the critical condition of many neurosurgical patients, this patient population is most sensitive and likely to be negatively affected by proposed future increased restrictions.

Morbidity, mortality, and health care costs for patients undergoing spine surgery following the ACGME resident duty-hour reform: Clinical article.

OBJECT: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) implemented resident duty-hour restrictions on July 1, 2003, in concern for patient and resident safety. Whereas studies have shown that duty-hour restrictions have increased resident quality of life, there have been mixed results with respect to patient outcomes. In this study, the authors have evaluated the effect of duty-hour restrictions on morbidity, mortality, length of stay (LOS), and charges in patients who underwent spine surgery. METHODS: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was used to evaluate the effect of duty-hour restrictions on complications, mortality, LOS, and charges by comparing the prereform (2000-2002) and postreform (2005-2008) periods. Outcomes were compared between nonteaching and teaching hospitals using a difference-in-differences (DID) method. Results A total of 693,058 patients were included in the study. The overall complication rate was 8.6%, with patients in the postreform era having a significantly higher rate than those in the pre-duty-hour restriction era (8.7% vs. 8.4%, p < 0.0001). Examination of hospital teaching status revealed complication rates to decrease in nonteaching hospitals (8.2% vs. 7.6%, p < 0.0001) while increasing in teaching institutions (8.6% vs. 9.6%, p < 0.0001) in the duty-hour reform era. The DID analysis to compare the magnitude in change between teaching and nonteaching institutions revealed that teaching institutions to had a significantly greater increase in complications during the postreform era (p = 0.0002). The overall mortality rate was 0.37%, with no significant difference between the pre- and post-duty-hour eras (0.39% vs. 0.36%, p = 0.12). However, the mortality rate significantly decreased in nonteaching hospitals in the postreform era (0.30% vs. 0.23%, p = 0.0008), while remaining the same in teaching institutions (0.46% vs. 0.46%, p = 0.75). The DID analysis to compare the changes in mortality between groups revealed that the difference between the effects approached significance (p = 0.069). The mean LOS for all patients was 4.2 days, with hospital stay decreasing in nonteaching hospitals (3.7 vs. 3.5 days, p < 0.0001) while significantly increasing in teaching institutions (4.7 vs. 4.8 days, p < 0.0001). The DID analysis did not demonstrate the magnitude of change for each group to differ significantly (p = 0.26). Total patient charges were seen to rise significantly in the post-duty-hour reform era, increasing from $40,000 in the prereform era to $69,000 in the postreform era. The DID analysis did not reveal a significant difference between the changes in charges between teaching and nonteaching hospitals (p = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of duty-hour restrictions was associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications for patients undergoing spine surgery. Therefore, contrary to its intended purpose, duty-hour reform may have resulted in worse patient outcomes. Additional studies are needed to evaluate strategies to mitigate these effects and assist in the development of future health care policy.