Oh I'm not saying it does, the person above seemed to be suggesting that we should focus on figuring out the residency conditions that lead to the best patient outcomes, rather than improve the conditions for residents, which suggests they believe worse conditions for residents may be better for patients.
Just to point out the obvious, people doing 80 hrs/week for 2 years (lower end of residency term I believe) are going to have twice as much 'experience' as people doing 40hrs/week for 2 years.
I suspect most of us here know more hours worked doesn't directly correlate with more retention of information and best practices, but that's the thinking.
I'm arguing that even if 80hrs/week residencies was the optimal amount of pressure to turn our fledgling residents into battle-hardened physicians, if you can get 99% of the effect with 40hrs/week, maybe do that instead. And again, I'm not even suggesting this is actually the case.
Just to point out the obvious, people doing 80 hrs/week for 2 years (lower end of residency term I believe) are going to have twice as much 'experience' as people doing 40hrs/week for 2 years.
I suspect most of us here know more hours worked doesn't directly correlate with more retention of information and best practices, but that's the thinking.
I'm arguing that even if 80hrs/week residencies was the optimal amount of pressure to turn our fledgling residents into battle-hardened physicians, if you can get 99% of the effect with 40hrs/week, maybe do that instead. And again, I'm not even suggesting this is actually the case.