Rachel R Kelz1,2, Bijan A Niknam3, Morgan M Sellers1, James E Sharpe3, Paul R Rosenbaum2,4, Alexander S Hill3, Hong Zhou3, Lauren L Hochman3, Karl Y Bilimoria5, Kamal Itani6,7, Patrick S Romano8, Jeffrey H Silber2,3,9,10,11. 1. Department of Surgery, Center for Surgery and Health Economics, The University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA. 2. The Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, The University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 3. Center for Outcomes Research, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA. 4. Department of Statistics, The Wharton School, The University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 5. Department of Surgery, Surgical Outcomes and Quality Improvement Center and Center for Healthcare Studies, Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago IL. 6. VA Boston Health Care System, Boston, MA. 7. Department of Surgery, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA. 8. Division of General Medicine and Center for Healthcare Policy and Research, University of California Davis School of Medicine, Sacramento, CA. 9. The Department of Pediatrics, The University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA. 10. Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, The University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA. 11. Department of Health Care Management, The Wharton School, The University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to address the controversy surrounding the effects of duty hour reform on new surgeon performance, we analyzed patients treated by new surgeons following the transition to independent practice. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: In 2003, duty hour reform affected all US surgical training programs. Its impact on the performance of new surgeons remains unstudied. METHODS: We studied 30-day mortality among 1,483,074 Medicare beneficiaries undergoing general and orthopedic operations between 1999 and 2003 ("traditional" era) and 2009 and 2013 ("modern" era). The operations were performed by 2762 new surgeons trained before the reform, 2119 new surgeons trained following reform and 15,041 experienced surgeons. We used a difference-in-differences analysis comparing outcomes in matched patients treated by new versus experienced surgeons within each era, controlling for the hospital, operation, and patient risk factors. RESULTS: Traditional era odds of 30-day mortality among matched patients treated by new versus experienced surgeons were significantly elevated [odds ratio (OR) 1.13; 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.05, 1.22), P < 0.001). The modern era elevated odds of mortality were not significant [OR 1.06; 95% CI (0.97-1.16), P = 0.239]. Relative performance of new and experienced surgeons with respect to 30-day mortality did not appear to change from the traditional era to the modern era [OR 0.93; 95% CI (0.83-1.05), P = 0.233]. There were statistically significant adverse changes over time in relative performance to experienced surgeons in prolonged length of stay [OR 1.08; 95% CI (1.02-1.15), P = 0.015], anesthesia time [9 min; 95% CI (8-10), P < 0.001], and costs [255USD; 95% CI (2-508), P = 0.049]. CONCLUSIONS: Duty hour reform showed no significant effect on 30-day mortality achieved by new surgeons compared to their more experienced colleagues. Patients of new surgeons, however, trained after duty hour reform displayed some increases in the resources needed for their care.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to address the controversy surrounding the effects of duty hour reform on new surgeon performance, we analyzed patients treated by new surgeons following the transition to independent practice. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: In 2003, duty hour reform affected all US surgical training programs. Its impact on the performance of new surgeons remains unstudied. METHODS: We studied 30-day mortality among 1,483,074 Medicare beneficiaries undergoing general and orthopedic operations between 1999 and 2003 ("traditional" era) and 2009 and 2013 ("modern" era). The operations were performed by 2762 new surgeons trained before the reform, 2119 new surgeons trained following reform and 15,041 experienced surgeons. We used a difference-in-differences analysis comparing outcomes in matched patients treated by new versus experienced surgeons within each era, controlling for the hospital, operation, and patient risk factors. RESULTS: Traditional era odds of 30-day mortality among matched patients treated by new versus experienced surgeons were significantly elevated [odds ratio (OR) 1.13; 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.05, 1.22), P < 0.001). The modern era elevated odds of mortality were not significant [OR 1.06; 95% CI (0.97-1.16), P = 0.239]. Relative performance of new and experienced surgeons with respect to 30-day mortality did not appear to change from the traditional era to the modern era [OR 0.93; 95% CI (0.83-1.05), P = 0.233]. There were statistically significant adverse changes over time in relative performance to experienced surgeons in prolonged length of stay [OR 1.08; 95% CI (1.02-1.15), P = 0.015], anesthesia time [9 min; 95% CI (8-10), P < 0.001], and costs [255USD; 95% CI (2-508), P = 0.049]. CONCLUSIONS: Duty hour reform showed no significant effect on 30-day mortality achieved by new surgeons compared to their more experienced colleagues. Patients of new surgeons, however, trained after duty hour reform displayed some increases in the resources needed for their care.
Authors: Katherine C Kellogg; Elizabeth Breen; Stephen J Ferzoco; Michael J Zinner; Stanley W Ashley Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2006-02-17 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Samer G Mattar; Adnan A Alseidi; Daniel B Jones; D Rohan Jeyarajah; Lee L Swanstrom; Ralph W Aye; Steven D Wexner; José M Martinez; Sharona B Ross; Michael M Awad; Morris E Franklin; Maurice E Arregui; Bruce D Schirmer; Rebecca M Minter Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Shari L Meyerson; Ezra N Teitelbaum; Brian C George; Mary C Schuller; Debra A DaRosa; Jonathan P Fryer Journal: J Surg Educ Date: 2014-06-10 Impact factor: 2.891
Authors: Jeffrey H Silber; Paul R Rosenbaum; Amy K Rosen; Patrick S Romano; Kamal M F Itani; Liyi Cen; Lanyu Mi; Michael J Halenar; Orit Even-Shoshan; Kevin G Volpp Journal: Med Care Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Mark A Fleming; Eric W Etchill; Katherine M Marsh; Emmanuel L Abebrese; Ivy Mannoh; Jeffrey W Gander; Alejandro V Garcia; Daniel E Levin Journal: Pediatr Surg Int Date: 2021-10-28 Impact factor: 1.827
Authors: Claire B Rosen; Sanford E Roberts; Chris J Wirtalla; Omar I Ramadan; Luke J Keele; Elinore J Kaufman; Scott D Halpern; Rachel R Kelz Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2022-10-17 Impact factor: 6.532
Authors: Angela E Thelen; Daniel E Kendrick; Xilin Chen; John Luckoski; Tanvi Gupta; Hoda Bandeh-Ahmadi; Michael Clark; Brian C George Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2021-10-21 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Rachel R Kelz; Morgan M Sellers; Bijan A Niknam; James E Sharpe; Paul R Rosenbaum; Alexander S Hill; Hong Zhou; Lauren L Hochman; Karl Y Bilimoria; Kamal Itani; Patrick S Romano; Jeffrey H Silber Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2021-02-01 Impact factor: 13.787
Authors: Brigitte K Smith; Samuel R G Finlayson; Bruce A Perler; Angela P Presson; Chelsea M Allen; Benjamin S Brooke Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2020-12-18 Impact factor: 13.787