PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 2321788

Work and rest cycles in anesthesia practice.

Abstract

A questionnaire inquiring about existing and desirable work and rest patterns appeared in a newsletter mailed to about 22,000 anesthesiologists and anesthesiology residents and 24,000 nurse anesthetists (CRNA). Almost 3,000 anonymous replies were received and analyzed. Respondents reported mean work weeks of 47.5 h (CRNA) to 69.8 h (residents), longest continuous period of administering anesthesia without a break of 6.6 h (CRNA) to 7.7 h (residents), and longest period of administering anesthesia with or without breaks of 14.1 h (CRNA) to 20 h (resident). However, the respondents considered it safe to administer anesthesia without a break for 4.2 (CRNA) to 5.2 h (anesthesiologists) and with break for 12.8 h (CRNA) to 15 h (residents). A substantial number of respondents believed that they work at least occasionally beyond their perceived self-limitations. The majority of respondents recalled having made errors in the administration of anesthesia that they attributed to fatigue. These results may not be representative of work patterns or attitudes among American anesthesia providers because of the small sample size and the resultant potential for bias. Yet, the subject deserves attention and further study because fatigue can affect professional performance, ability to learn, and family life.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J S Gravenstein, J B Cooper, F K Orkin. 1990. Work and rest cycles in anesthesia practice.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542-199004000-00024

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Perception of training needs and opportunities in advanced airway skills: a survey of British and Irish trainees.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: We surveyed delegates at the Group of Anaesthetists in Training (UK) meeting to investigate evidence of a training-gap (number of fibreoptic intubations believed to bestow competence vs. number actually performed). METHODS: Questionnaires were distributed to and collected from delegates in person. Questions covered six areas, including experience of fibreoptic intubation and cricothyrotomy, fibreoptic intubation as a specialist skill and ethical issues. RESULTS: We received 221 replies (76%). All trainees believed competence to be achievable with 10 intubations (interquartile range (IQR) 10-20); the median number performed was 2 (IQR 0-4). This was statistically significant for the groups' senior house officers, 1st and 2nd year registrars and 3rd and 4th year registrars; P < 0.0001. Many final year trainees (12/20, 60%) also failed to achieve their competency target. Few trainees had seen or performed any cricothyrotomies (medians 0, IQRs 0-1 and 0-0). Most (195/208, 94%) believed that fibreoptic intubation was a core skill and 199/212 (94%) believed that all should be competent by completion of training. Ten percent (n = 208) felt it unethical to perform an awake training intubation with full consent and 10% believed it acceptable without explanation. Most (82.7%) would fibreoptically intubate an asleep patient (requiring intubation) without consent. CONCLUSION: Trainees reported a gap between their perception of competence and achievement in awake fibreoptic intubation. Simple and complex simulations and structured training programmes may help. Anaesthetists must address the ethics of clinical training in advanced airway management.

Anesthesiology↗