SESC Practice Committee survey: surgical practice in the duty-hour restriction era

Abstract

Debate continues as to the relevance of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) duty-hour restrictions in actual practice and the adequacy of resident training in surgery. A survey of the membership of the Southeastern Surgical Congress using an Internet-based questionnaire was conducted: adherence to duty-hour restrictions, evidence of sleepiness and fatigue, opinions regarding the training, and clinical performance of surgeons who had trained after the institution of duty-hour restrictions in 2003 (termed "recently trained surgeons"). One hundred seventy-seven members respondents out of 1008 (18%). Most (101 of 170 [59%]) worked more than 80 hours in a week and half (86 of 174 [49%]) more than 24 hours consecutively once or more a month. Falling asleep inappropriately was reported by 6 to 12 per cent. Forty per cent (71 of 176) thought that graduates of residencies today are prepared for clinical practice. Those who had hired a recently trained surgeon believed the latter was sufficiently trained (61 of 123 [50%]) more often than those who had not hired one (10 of 51 [20%]; P = 0.006). Those with a new colleague gave first assistant help in 75 per cent (91 of 121) during the first year. Surgeons in practice regularly violate ACGME duty-hour restrictions. Many surgeons have doubts whether new graduates of residency training programs have adequate training to practice surgery. Those who have hired a new surgeon trained under duty-hour restrictions are more likely to be satisfied with the latter's training. Most new trainees receive direct assistance from their practice partners, continuing their training beyond residency.