CONTEXT: A 2009 Institute of Medicine report recommended protected sleep periods for medicine trainees on extended overnight shifts, a position reinforced by new Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requirements. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and consequences of protected sleep periods during extended duty. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized controlled trial conducted at the Philadelphia VA Medical Center medical service and Oncology Unit of the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (2009-2010). Of the 106 interns and senior medical students who consented, 3 were not scheduled on any study rotations. Among the others, 44 worked at the VA center, 16 at the university hospital, and 43 at both. INTERVENTION: Twelve 4-week blocks were randomly assigned to either a standard intern schedule (extended duty overnight shifts of up to 30 hours; equivalent to 1200 overnight intern shifts at each site), or a protected sleep period (protected time from 12:30 AM to 5:30 AM with handover of work cell phone; equivalent to 1200 overnight intern shifts at each site). Participants were asked to wear wrist actigraphs and complete sleep diaries. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was hours slept during the protected period on extended duty overnight shifts. Secondary outcome measures included hours slept during a 24-hour period (noon to noon) by day of call cycle and Karolinska sleepiness scale. RESULTS: For 98.3% of on-call nights, cell phones were signed out as designed. At the VA center, participants with protected sleep had a mean 2.86 hours (95% CI, 2.57-3.10 hours) of sleep vs 1.98 hours (95% CI, 1.68-2.28 hours) among those who did not have protected hours of sleep (P < .001). At the university hospital, participants with protected sleep had a mean 3.04 hours (95% CI, 2.77-3.45 hours) of sleep vs 2.04 hours (95% CI, 1.79-2.24) among those who did not have protected sleep (P < .001). Participants with protected sleep were significantly less likely to have call nights with no sleep: 5.8% (95% CI, 3.0%-8.5%) vs 18.6% (95% CI, 13.9%-23.2%) at the VA center (P < .001) and 5.9% (95% CI, 3.1%-8.7%) vs 14.2% (95% CI, 9.9%-18.4%) at the university hospital (P = .001). Participants felt less sleepy after on-call nights in the intervention group, with Karolinska sleepiness scale scores of 6.65 (95% CI, 6.35-6.97) vs 7.10 (95% CI, 6.85-7.33; P = .01) at the VA center and 5.91 (95% CI, 5.64-6.16) vs 6.79 (95% CI, 6.57-7.04; P < .001) at the university hospital. CONCLUSIONS: For internal medicine services at 2 hospitals, implementation of a protected sleep period while on call resulted in an increase in overnight sleep duration and improved alertness the next morning. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00874510.
RCT Entities:
CONTEXT: A 2009 Institute of Medicine report recommended protected sleep periods for medicine trainees on extended overnight shifts, a position reinforced by new Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requirements. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and consequences of protected sleep periods during extended duty. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized controlled trial conducted at the Philadelphia VA Medical Center medical service and Oncology Unit of the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (2009-2010). Of the 106 interns and senior medical students who consented, 3 were not scheduled on any study rotations. Among the others, 44 worked at the VA center, 16 at the university hospital, and 43 at both. INTERVENTION: Twelve 4-week blocks were randomly assigned to either a standard intern schedule (extended duty overnight shifts of up to 30 hours; equivalent to 1200 overnight intern shifts at each site), or a protected sleep period (protected time from 12:30 AM to 5:30 AM with handover of work cell phone; equivalent to 1200 overnight intern shifts at each site). Participants were asked to wear wrist actigraphs and complete sleep diaries. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was hours slept during the protected period on extended duty overnight shifts. Secondary outcome measures included hours slept during a 24-hour period (noon to noon) by day of call cycle and Karolinska sleepiness scale. RESULTS: For 98.3% of on-call nights, cell phones were signed out as designed. At the VA center, participants with protected sleep had a mean 2.86 hours (95% CI, 2.57-3.10 hours) of sleep vs 1.98 hours (95% CI, 1.68-2.28 hours) among those who did not have protected hours of sleep (P < .001). At the university hospital, participants with protected sleep had a mean 3.04 hours (95% CI, 2.77-3.45 hours) of sleep vs 2.04 hours (95% CI, 1.79-2.24) among those who did not have protected sleep (P < .001). Participants with protected sleep were significantly less likely to have call nights with no sleep: 5.8% (95% CI, 3.0%-8.5%) vs 18.6% (95% CI, 13.9%-23.2%) at the VA center (P < .001) and 5.9% (95% CI, 3.1%-8.7%) vs 14.2% (95% CI, 9.9%-18.4%) at the university hospital (P = .001). Participants felt less sleepy after on-call nights in the intervention group, with Karolinska sleepiness scale scores of 6.65 (95% CI, 6.35-6.97) vs 7.10 (95% CI, 6.85-7.33; P = .01) at the VA center and 5.91 (95% CI, 5.64-6.16) vs 6.79 (95% CI, 6.57-7.04; P < .001) at the university hospital. CONCLUSIONS: For internal medicine services at 2 hospitals, implementation of a protected sleep period while on call resulted in an increase in overnight sleep duration and improved alertness the next morning. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00874510.
Authors: Laura K Barger; Brian E Cade; Najib T Ayas; John W Cronin; Bernard Rosner; Frank E Speizer; Charles A Czeisler Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-01-13 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: A Takashima; K M Petersson; F Rutters; I Tendolkar; O Jensen; M J Zwarts; B L McNaughton; G Fernández Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2006-01-06 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Najib T Ayas; Laura K Barger; Brian E Cade; Dean M Hashimoto; Bernard Rosner; John W Cronin; Frank E Speizer; Charles A Czeisler Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-09-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Christopher S Parshuram; Andre C K B Amaral; Niall D Ferguson; G Ross Baker; Edward E Etchells; Virginia Flintoft; John Granton; Lorelei Lingard; Haresh Kirpalani; Sangeeta Mehta; Harvey Moldofsky; Damon C Scales; Thomas E Stewart; Andrew R Willan; Jan O Friedrich Journal: CMAJ Date: 2015-02-09 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Mathias Basner; David F Dinges; Judy A Shea; Dylan S Small; Jingsan Zhu; Laurie Norton; Adrian J Ecker; Cristina Novak; Lisa M Bellini; Kevin G Volpp Journal: Sleep Date: 2017-04-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Rita N Bakhru; Mathias Basner; Meeta Prasad Kerlin; Scott D Halpern; John Hansen-Flaschen; Ilene M Rosen; David F Dinges; William D Schweickert Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2019-07 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Judy A Shea; Lisa M Bellini; David F Dinges; Meredith L Curtis; Yuanyuan Tao; Jingsan Zhu; Dylan S Small; Mathias Basner; Laurie Norton; Cristina Novak; C Jessica Dine; Ilene M Rosen; Kevin G Volpp Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2014-06