←back to thread

589 points gmays | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.43s | source
Show context
HEmanZ ◴[] No.45773856[source]
I hope that the actual medical field starts taking note of this.

My wife still has to work 24 hour shifts with no sleep, performing emergency surgeries no matter how long it has been since she slept. During residency only a few years ago she and her co-residents were almost weekly required to do 36 hour shifts (on top of their regular 16 hours per day, 5 day per week schedule) and once even a 48 hour shift when the hospital was short staffed.

Of course I’m sure they won’t. No one cares if doctors are over worked.

replies(8): >>45773889 #>>45773957 #>>45774041 #>>45776032 #>>45776905 #>>45777157 #>>45779710 #>>45783253 #
lordnacho ◴[] No.45773889[source]
I've never understood those long shifts. Unless a shift just means you are there but sleeping, what is the reason for allowing it? We don't let truck drivers do 24h shifts, why do doctors the world over seem to do this?
replies(5): >>45773995 #>>45774056 #>>45774388 #>>45775230 #>>45776481 #
munificent ◴[] No.45773995[source]
My understanding is that the research shows that the harm to patient care from information loss during doctor shift turnover is worse than the harm from fatigued doctors.

Yes, a tired doctor sucks. But a tired doctor who already has the patient's state loaded into their head may still be better than doctor who is completely fresh in both senses.

It's a hard problem.

replies(7): >>45774057 #>>45774209 #>>45775202 #>>45775500 #>>45775573 #>>45775907 #>>45778447 #
1. Fire-Dragon-DoL ◴[] No.45774209[source]
What about the harm to the doctor themselves+the harm to the patient? Would the sum of both be worse?
replies(1): >>45774383 #
2. arjvik ◴[] No.45774383[source]
One signed up knowing the risk

(not defending, I also think its insane, just devils advocate)