Residents' perceptions of a night float system

Background. A Night Float (NF) system has been implemented by many institutions to address increasing concerns about residents' work hours. The purpose of our study was to examine the perceptions of residents towards a NF system. Methods. A 115-item questionnaire was developed to assess residents' perceptions of the NF rotation as compared with a regular call month. The categories included patient care, education, medical errors, and overall satisfaction. Internal Medicine housestaff (post-graduate years 1-3) from three hospital settings at the University of Pittsburgh completed the questionnaire. Results. The response rate was 90% (n = 149). Of these, 74 had completed the NF rotation. The housestaff felt that the quality of patient care was improved because of NF (41% agreed and 18% disagreed). A majority also felt that better care was provided by a rested physician in spite of being less familiar with the patient (46% agreed and 21% disagreed). Most felt that there was less emphasis on education (65%) and more emphasis on service (52%) during NF. Overall, the residents felt more rested during their call months (83%) and strongly supported the 80-hour workweek requirement (77%). Conclusion. Housestaff felt that the overall quality of patient care was improved by a NF system. The perceived improved quality of care by a rested physician coupled with a perceived decrease in the emphasis on education may have significant implications in housestaff training. © 2009 Jasti et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

Understanding the challenges to facilitating active learning in the resident conferences: a qualitative study of internal medicine faculty and resident perspectives

Background: In the Next Accreditation System, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education outlines milestones for medical knowledge and requires regular didactic sessions in residency training. There are many challenges to facilitating active learning in resident conferences, and we need to better understand resident learning preferences and faculty perspectives on facilitating active learning. The goal of this study was to identify challenges to facilitating active learning in resident conferences, both through identifying specific implementation barriers and identifying differences in perspective between faculty and residents on effective teaching and learning strategies. Methods: The investigators invited core residency faculty to participate in focus groups. The investigators used a semistructured guide to facilitate discussion about learning preferences and teaching perspectives in the conference setting and used an ‘editing approach’ within a grounded theory framework to qualitative analysis to code the transcripts and analyze the results. Data were compared to previously collected data from seven resident focus groups. Results: Three focus groups with 20 core faculty were conducted. We identified three domains pertaining to facilitating active learning in resident conferences: barriers to facilitating active learning formats, similarities and differences in faculty and resident learning preferences, and divergence between faculty and resident opinions about effective teaching strategies. Faculty identified several setting, faculty, and resident barriers to facilitating active learning in resident conferences. When compared to residents, faculty expressed similar learning preferences; the main differences were in motivations for conference attendance and type of content. Resident preferences and faculty perspectives differed on the amount of information appropriate for lecture and the role of active participation in resident conferences. Conclusion: This study highlights several challenges to facilitating active learning in resident conferences and provides insights for residency faculty who seek to transform the conference learning environment within their residency program