MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046487604 · doi:10.1503/cjs.050809

Quality of life and educational benefit among orthopedic surgery residents: a prospective, multicentre comparison of the night float and the standard call systems

2011· article· en· W2046487604 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Ali Zahrai

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Surgery · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProspective cohort studyQuality of life (healthcare)Orthopedic surgeryPhysical therapyFamily medicineEmergency medicineGerontologySurgeryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Given recent evolving guidelines regarding postcall clinical relief of residents and emphasis on quality of life, novel strategies are required for implementing call schedules. The night float system has been used by some institutions as a strategy to decrease the burden of call on resident quality of life in level-1 trauma centres. The purpose of this study was to determine whether there are differences in quality of life, work-related stressors and educational experience between orthopedic surgery residents in the night float and standard call systems at 2 level-1 trauma centres. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study at 2 level-1 trauma hospitals comprising a standard call (1 night in 4) group and a night float (5 14-hour shifts [5 pm-7 am] from Monday to Friday) group for each hospital. Over the course of a 6-month rotation, each resident completed 3 weeks of night float. The remainder of the time on the trauma service consists of clinical duties from 6:30 am to 5:30 pm on a daily basis and intermittent coverage of weekend call only. Residents completed the Short Form-36 (SF-36) general quality-of-life questionnaire, as well as questionnaires on stress level and educational experience before the rotation (baseline) and at 2, 4 and 6 months. We performed an analysis of covariance to compare between-group differences using the baseline scores as covariates and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests (nonparametric) to determine if the residents' SF-36 scores were different from the age- and sex-matched Canadian norms. We analyzed predictors of resident quality of life using multivariable mixed models. RESULTS: Seven residents were in the standard call group and 9 in the night float group, for a total of 16 residents (all men, mean age 35.1 yr). Controlling for between-group differences at baseline, residents on the night float rotation had significantly lower role physical, bodily pain, social function and physical component scale scores over the 6-month observation period. Compared with the Canadian normative population, the night float group had significantly lower SF-36 scores in all subscales except for bodily pain. There were no differences noted between the standard call group and Canadian norms at 6 months. No differences in educational benefits and stress level were measured between the 2 groups. Lack of time for physical activity was only significant in the night float group. Regression analysis demonstrated that the increased number of hours in hospital correlated with significantly lower SF-36 scores in almost all domains. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that the residents in the standard call group had better health-related quality of life compared with those in the night float group. No differences existed in subjective educational benefits and stress level between the groups.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.116
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of SurgerySame topicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutFrench-language works237,207