Comparing Technical Dexterity of Sleep-Deprived Versus Intoxicated Surgeons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The evidence on the effect of sleep deprivation on the cognitive and motor skills of physicians in training is sparse and conflicting, and the evidence is nonexistent on surgeons in practice. Work-hour limitations based on these data have contributed to challenges in the quality of surgical education under the apprentice model, and as a result there is an increasing focus on competency-based education. Whereas the effects of alcohol intoxication on psychometric performance are well studied in many professions, the effects on performance in surgery are not well documented. To study the effects of sleep deprivation on the surgical performance of surgeons, we compared simulated the laparoscopic skills of staff gynecologists "under 2 conditions": sleep deprivation and ethanol intoxication. We hypothesized that the performance of unconsciously competent surgeons does not deteriorate postcall as it does under the influence of alcohol. METHODS: Nine experienced staff gynecologists performed 3 laparoscopic tasks in increasing order of difficulty (cup drop, rope passing, pegboard exchange) on a box trainer while sleep deprived (<3 hours in 24 hours) and subsequently when legally intoxicated (>0.08 mg/mL blood alcohol concentration). Three expert laparoscopic surgeons scored the anonymous clips online using Global Objective Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills criteria: depth perception, bimanual dexterity, and efficiency. Data were analyzed by a mixed-design analysis of variance. RESULTS: There were large differences in mean performance between the tasks. With increasing task difficulty, mean scores became significantly (P < .05) poorer. For the easy tasks, the scores for sleep-deprived and intoxicated participants were similar for all variables except time. Surprisingly, participants took less time to complete the easy tasks when intoxicated. However, the most difficult task took less time but was performed significantly worse compared with being sleep deprived. Notably, the evaluators did not recognize a lack of competence for the easier tasks when intoxicated; incompetence surfaced only in the most difficult task. CONCLUSIONS: Being intoxicated hinders the performance of more difficult simulated laparoscopic tasks than being sleep deprived, yet surgeons were faster and performed better on simple tasks when intoxicated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".