In the wake of the 2003 and 2011 duty hours regulations, how do internal medicine interns spend their time?

BACKGROUND: The 2003 and 2011 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) common program requirements compress busy inpatient schedules and increase intern supervision. At the same time, interns wrestle with the effects of electronic medical record systems, including documentation needs and availability of an ever-increasing amount of stored patient data. OBJECTIVE: In light of these changes, we conducted a time motion study to determine how internal medicine interns spend their time in the hospital. DESIGN: Descriptive, observational study on inpatient ward rotations at two internal medicine residency programs at large academic medical centers in Baltimore, MD during January, 2012. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-nine interns at the two residency programs. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was percent of time spent in direct patient care (talking with and examining patients). Secondary outcomes included percent of time spent in indirect patient care, education, and miscellaneous activities (eating, sleeping, and walking). Results were analyzed using multilevel regression analysis adjusted for clustering at the observer and intern levels. KEY RESULTS: Interns were observed for a total of 873 hours. Interns spent 12 % of their time in direct patient care, 64 % in indirect patient care, 15 % in educational activities, and 9 % in miscellaneous activities. Computer use occupied 40 % of interns' time. There was no significant difference in time spent in these activities between the two sites. CONCLUSIONS: Interns today spend a minority of their time directly caring for patients. Compared with interns in time motion studies prior to 2003, interns in our study spent less time in direct patient care and sleeping, and more time talking with other providers and documenting. Reduced work hours in the setting of increasing complexity of medical inpatients, growing volume of patient data, and increased supervision may limit the amount of time interns spend with patients.

Assessing intern handover processes.

BACKGROUND: New standards for resident work hours set in 2011 changed the landscape of patient care in teaching hospitals, and resulted in new challenges for US residency training programmes to overcome. One such challenge was a dramatic increase in the number of patient handovers performed by residents. As a result, there is a renewed focus for clinical teachers to develop educational strategies to optimise the patient handover process and improve the quality of patient care and safety. METHODS: In order to investigate current gaps in resident handovers, we examined the handover processes performed by medicine interns at two academic medical centres in Baltimore, Maryland, USA. We used trained observers to collect data on whether handovers were conducted face to face, with questions asked, in private locations, with written documentation, and without distractions or interruptions. Results were analysed using chi-square tests, and adjusted for clustering at the observer and intern levels. RESULTS: Interns successfully conducted handovers face to face (99.5%), asked questions (85.3%), used private locations (91%), included written handover documentation (95.8%) and did not experience distractions for the majority of the time (87.7%); however, interruptions were pervasive, occurring 41.3 per cent of the time. In order to investigate current gaps in resident handovers, we examined the handover processes performed by medicine interns DISCUSSION: Interns conducted patient handovers face to face, with questions asked, in private locations, with written documentation and without distractions the majority of the time; however, interruptions during the handover process were common. Exploring gaps at the individual programme level is a critical first step to develop effective teaching strategies to optimise handovers in residency.

Variability in hand hygiene practices among internal medicine interns.

Hand hygiene compliance remains suboptimal among physicians despite quality improvement efforts. We observed hand hygiene compliance among 29 medicine interns at 2 large academic institutions. Overall compliance was 75%. Although 4 interns averaged <40% compliance, 14 averaged at least 80%. Given variability observed among individuals in the same training programs, targeting those with poor performance may be important in improving overall compliance.