John Cronin

BACKGROUND: Although sleep deprivation has been shown to impair neurobehavioral performance, few studies have measured its effects on medical errors. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized study comparing the rates of serious medical errors made by interns while they were working according to a traditional schedule with extended (24 hours or more) work shifts every other shift (an "every third night" call schedule) and while they were working according to an intervention schedule that eliminated extended work shifts and reduced the number of hours worked per week. Incidents were identified by means of a multidisciplinary, four-pronged approach that included direct, continuous observation. Two physicians who were unaware of the interns' schedule assignments independently rated each incident. RESULTS: During a total of 2203 patient-days involving 634 admissions, interns made 35.9 percent more serious medical errors during the traditional schedule than during the intervention schedule (136.0 vs. 100.1 per 1000 patient-days, P<0.001), including 56.6 percent more nonintercepted serious errors (P<0.001). The total rate of serious errors on the critical care units was 22.0 percent higher during the traditional schedule than during the intervention schedule (193.2 vs. 158.4 per 1000 patient-days, P<0.001). Interns made 20.8 percent more serious medication errors during the traditional schedule than during the intervention schedule (99.7 vs. 82.5 per 1000 patient-days, P=0.03). Interns also made 5.6 times as many serious diagnostic errors during the traditional schedule as during the intervention schedule (18.6 vs. 3.3 per 1000 patient-days, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Interns made substantially more serious medical errors when they worked frequent shifts of 24 hours or more than when they worked shorter shifts. Eliminating extended work shifts and reducing the number of hours interns work per week can reduce serious medical errors in the intensive care unit. Copyright © 2004 Massachusetts Medical Society.

OBJECTIVE: Critically ill patients require high-intensity care and may be at especially high risk of iatrogenic injury because they are severely ill. We sought to study the incidence and nature of adverse events and serious errors in the critical care setting. DESIGN: We conducted a prospective 1-year observational study. Incidents were collected with use of a multifaceted approach including direct continuous observation. Two physicians independently assessed incident type, severity, and preventability as well as systems-related and individual performance failures. SETTING: Academic, tertiary-care urban hospital. PATIENTS: Medical intensive care unit and coronary care unit patients. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcomes of interest were the incidence and rates of adverse events and serious errors per 1000 patient-days. A total of 391 patients with 420 unit admissions were studied during 1490 patient-days. We found 120 adverse events in 79 patients (20.2%), including 66 (55%) nonpreventable and 54 (45%) preventable adverse events as well as 223 serious errors. The rates per 1000 patient-days for all adverse events, preventable adverse events, and serious errors were 80.5, 36.2, and 149.7, respectively. Among adverse events, 13% (16/120) were life-threatening or fatal; and among serious errors, 11% (24/223) were potentially life-threatening. Most serious medical errors occurred during the ordering or execution of treatments, especially medications (61%; 170/277). Performance level failures were most commonly slips and lapses (53%; 148/277), rather than rule-based or knowledge-based mistakes. CONCLUSIONS: Adverse events and serious errors involving critically ill patients were common and often potentially life-threatening. Although many types of errors were identified, failure to carry out intended treatment correctly was the leading category.

BACKGROUND: Long work hours and work shifts of an extended duration (> or =24 hours) remain a hallmark of medical education in the United States. Yet their effect on health and safety has not been evaluated with the use of validated measures. METHODS: We conducted a prospective nationwide, Web-based survey in which 2737 residents in their first postgraduate year (interns) completed 17,003 monthly reports that provided detailed information about work hours, work shifts of an extended duration, documented motor vehicle crashes, near-miss incidents, and incidents involving involuntary sleeping. RESULTS: The odds ratios for reporting a motor vehicle crash and for reporting a near-miss incident after an extended work shift, as compared with a shift that was not of extended duration, were 2.3 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.6 to 3.3) and 5.9 (95 percent confidence interval, 5.4 to 6.3), respectively. In a prospective analysis, every extended work shift that was scheduled in a month increased the monthly risk of a motor vehicle crash by 9.1 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 3.4 to 14.7 percent) and increased the monthly risk of a crash during the commute from work by 16.2 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 7.8 to 24.7 percent). In months in which interns worked five or more extended shifts, the risk that they would fall asleep while driving or while stopped in traffic was significantly increased (odds ratios, 2.39 [95 percent confidence interval, 2.31 to 2.46] and 3.69 [95 percent confidence interval, 3.60 to 3.77], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Extended-duration work shifts, which are currently sanctioned by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, pose safety hazards for interns. These results have implications for medical residency programs, which routinely schedule physicians to work more than 24 consecutive hours.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of the physiological effects of extended (24 hours or more) work shifts in postgraduate medical training is limited. We aimed to quantify work hours, sleep, and attentional failures among first-year residents (postgraduate year 1) during a traditional rotation schedule that included extended work shifts and during an intervention schedule that limited scheduled work hours to 16 or fewer consecutive hours. METHODS: Twenty interns were studied during two three-week rotations in intensive care units, each during both the traditional and the intervention schedule. Subjects completed daily sleep logs that were validated with regular weekly episodes (72 to 96 hours) of continuous polysomnography (r=0.94) and work logs that were validated by means of direct observation by study staff (r=0.98). RESULTS: Seventeen of 20 interns worked more than 80 hours per week during the traditional schedule (mean, 84.9; range, 74.2 to 92.1). All interns worked less than 80 hours per week during the intervention schedule (mean, 65.4; range, 57.6 to 76.3). On average, interns worked 19.5 hours per week less (P<0.001), slept 5.8 hours per week more (P<0.001), slept more in the 24 hours preceding each working hour (P<0.001), and had less than half the rate of attentional failures while working during on-call nights (P=0.02) on the intervention schedule as compared with the traditional schedule. CONCLUSIONS: Eliminating interns' extended work shifts in an intensive care unit significantly increased sleep and decreased attentional failures during night work hours.

BACKGROUND: A recent randomized controlled trial in critical-care units revealed that the elimination of extended-duration work shifts (> or =24 h) reduces the rates of significant medical errors and polysomnographically recorded attentional failures. This raised the concern that the extended-duration shifts commonly worked by interns may contribute to the risk of medical errors being made, and perhaps to the risk of adverse events more generally. Our current study assessed whether extended-duration shifts worked by interns are associated with significant medical errors, adverse events, and attentional failures in a diverse population of interns across the United States. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a Web-based survey, across the United States, in which 2,737 residents in their first postgraduate year (interns) completed 17,003 monthly reports. The association between the number of extended-duration shifts worked in the month and the reporting of significant medical errors, preventable adverse events, and attentional failures was assessed using a case-crossover analysis in which each intern acted as his/her own control. Compared to months in which no extended-duration shifts were worked, during months in which between one and four extended-duration shifts and five or more extended-duration shifts were worked, the odds ratios of reporting at least one fatigue-related significant medical error were 3.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.3-3.7) and 7.5 (95% CI, 7.2-7.8), respectively. The respective odds ratios for fatigue-related preventable adverse events, 8.7 (95% CI, 3.4-22) and 7.0 (95% CI, 4.3-11), were also increased. Interns working five or more extended-duration shifts per month reported more attentional failures during lectures, rounds, and clinical activities, including surgery and reported 300% more fatigue-related preventable adverse events resulting in a fatality. CONCLUSIONS: In our survey, extended-duration work shifts were associated with an increased risk of significant medical errors, adverse events, and attentional failures in interns across the United States. These results have important public policy implications for postgraduate medical education.