ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Implementation of resident duty hour policies has resulted in a need to document work hours accurately. We compared the number of self-reported duty hour violations identified through an anonymous, resident-administered survey to that obtained from a standardized, ACGME-sanctioned electronic tracking system. METHODS: 10 cross-sectional surveys were administered to general surgery residents over five years. A resident representative collected and de-identified the data. RESULTS: A median of 54 residents (52% male) participated per cohort. 429 responses were received (79% response rate). 111 violations were reported through the survey, while the standardized electronic system identified 76, a trend significantly associated with PGY-level (pâ¯<â¯0.001) and driven by first-year residents (nâ¯=â¯81 versus 37, pâ¯=â¯0.001). CONCLUSIONS: An anonymous, resident-run mechanism identifies significantly more self-reported violations than a standardized electronic tracking system alone. This argues for individual program evaluation of duty hour tracking mechanisms to correct systematic issues that could otherwise lead to repeated violations.
