Cargando…

Impact of Attending Physicians' Comments on Residents’ Workloads in the Emergency Department: Results from Two J(^o^)PAN Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether peppy comments from attending physicians increased the workload of residents working in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: We conducted two parallel-group, assessor-blinded, randomized trials at the ED in a tertiary care hospital in western Japan. Twenty-five resid...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kuriyama, Akira, Umakoshi, Noriyuki, Fujinaga, Jun, Kaihara, Toshie, Urushidani, Seigo, Kuninaga, Naoki, Ichikawa, Motohiro, Ienaga, Shinichiro, Sasaki, Akira, Ikegami, Tetsunori
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5147894/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27936189
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0167480
_version_ 1782473754765426688
author Kuriyama, Akira
Umakoshi, Noriyuki
Fujinaga, Jun
Kaihara, Toshie
Urushidani, Seigo
Kuninaga, Naoki
Ichikawa, Motohiro
Ienaga, Shinichiro
Sasaki, Akira
Ikegami, Tetsunori
author_facet Kuriyama, Akira
Umakoshi, Noriyuki
Fujinaga, Jun
Kaihara, Toshie
Urushidani, Seigo
Kuninaga, Naoki
Ichikawa, Motohiro
Ienaga, Shinichiro
Sasaki, Akira
Ikegami, Tetsunori
author_sort Kuriyama, Akira
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To examine whether peppy comments from attending physicians increased the workload of residents working in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: We conducted two parallel-group, assessor-blinded, randomized trials at the ED in a tertiary care hospital in western Japan. Twenty-five residents who examined either ambulatory (J(^o^)PAN-1 Trial) or transferred patients (J(^o^)PAN-2 Trial) in the ED on weekdays. Participants were randomly assigned to groups that either received a peppy message such as “Hope you have a quiet day!” (intervention group) or did not (control group) from the attending physicians. Both trials were conducted from June 2014 through March 2015. For each trial, residents rated the number of patients examined during and the busyness and difficulty of their shifts on a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: A total of 169 randomizations (intervention group, 81; control group, 88) were performed for the J(^o^)PAN-1 Trial, and 178 (intervention group, 85; control group, 93) for the J(^o^)PAN-2 Trial. In the J(^o^)PAN-1 trial, no differences were observed in the number of ambulatory patients examined during their shifts (5.5 and 5.7, respectively, p = 0.48), the busyness of their shifts (2.8 vs 2.8; p = 0.58), or the difficulty of their shifts (3.1 vs 3.1, p = 0.94). However, in the J(^o^)PAN-2 trial, although busyness (2.8 vs 2.7; p = 0.40) and difficulty (3.1 vs 3.2; p = 0.75) were similar between groups, the intervention group examined more transferred patients than the control group (4.4 vs 3.9; p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Peppy comments from attending physicians had a minimal jinxing effect on the workload of residents working in the ED. TRIAL REGISTRATION: University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR), UMIN000017193 and UMIN000017194.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5147894
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51478942016-12-28 Impact of Attending Physicians' Comments on Residents’ Workloads in the Emergency Department: Results from Two J(^o^)PAN Randomized Controlled Trials Kuriyama, Akira Umakoshi, Noriyuki Fujinaga, Jun Kaihara, Toshie Urushidani, Seigo Kuninaga, Naoki Ichikawa, Motohiro Ienaga, Shinichiro Sasaki, Akira Ikegami, Tetsunori PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVE: To examine whether peppy comments from attending physicians increased the workload of residents working in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: We conducted two parallel-group, assessor-blinded, randomized trials at the ED in a tertiary care hospital in western Japan. Twenty-five residents who examined either ambulatory (J(^o^)PAN-1 Trial) or transferred patients (J(^o^)PAN-2 Trial) in the ED on weekdays. Participants were randomly assigned to groups that either received a peppy message such as “Hope you have a quiet day!” (intervention group) or did not (control group) from the attending physicians. Both trials were conducted from June 2014 through March 2015. For each trial, residents rated the number of patients examined during and the busyness and difficulty of their shifts on a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: A total of 169 randomizations (intervention group, 81; control group, 88) were performed for the J(^o^)PAN-1 Trial, and 178 (intervention group, 85; control group, 93) for the J(^o^)PAN-2 Trial. In the J(^o^)PAN-1 trial, no differences were observed in the number of ambulatory patients examined during their shifts (5.5 and 5.7, respectively, p = 0.48), the busyness of their shifts (2.8 vs 2.8; p = 0.58), or the difficulty of their shifts (3.1 vs 3.1, p = 0.94). However, in the J(^o^)PAN-2 trial, although busyness (2.8 vs 2.7; p = 0.40) and difficulty (3.1 vs 3.2; p = 0.75) were similar between groups, the intervention group examined more transferred patients than the control group (4.4 vs 3.9; p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Peppy comments from attending physicians had a minimal jinxing effect on the workload of residents working in the ED. TRIAL REGISTRATION: University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR), UMIN000017193 and UMIN000017194. Public Library of Science 2016-12-09 /pmc/articles/PMC5147894/ /pubmed/27936189 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0167480 Text en © 2016 Kuriyama et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Kuriyama, Akira
Umakoshi, Noriyuki
Fujinaga, Jun
Kaihara, Toshie
Urushidani, Seigo
Kuninaga, Naoki
Ichikawa, Motohiro
Ienaga, Shinichiro
Sasaki, Akira
Ikegami, Tetsunori
Impact of Attending Physicians' Comments on Residents’ Workloads in the Emergency Department: Results from Two J(^o^)PAN Randomized Controlled Trials
title Impact of Attending Physicians' Comments on Residents’ Workloads in the Emergency Department: Results from Two J(^o^)PAN Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full Impact of Attending Physicians' Comments on Residents’ Workloads in the Emergency Department: Results from Two J(^o^)PAN Randomized Controlled Trials
title_fullStr Impact of Attending Physicians' Comments on Residents’ Workloads in the Emergency Department: Results from Two J(^o^)PAN Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full_unstemmed Impact of Attending Physicians' Comments on Residents’ Workloads in the Emergency Department: Results from Two J(^o^)PAN Randomized Controlled Trials
title_short Impact of Attending Physicians' Comments on Residents’ Workloads in the Emergency Department: Results from Two J(^o^)PAN Randomized Controlled Trials
title_sort impact of attending physicians' comments on residents’ workloads in the emergency department: results from two j(^o^)pan randomized controlled trials
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5147894/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27936189
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0167480
work_keys_str_mv AT kuriyamaakira impactofattendingphysicianscommentsonresidentsworkloadsintheemergencydepartmentresultsfromtwojopanrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT umakoshinoriyuki impactofattendingphysicianscommentsonresidentsworkloadsintheemergencydepartmentresultsfromtwojopanrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT fujinagajun impactofattendingphysicianscommentsonresidentsworkloadsintheemergencydepartmentresultsfromtwojopanrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT kaiharatoshie impactofattendingphysicianscommentsonresidentsworkloadsintheemergencydepartmentresultsfromtwojopanrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT urushidaniseigo impactofattendingphysicianscommentsonresidentsworkloadsintheemergencydepartmentresultsfromtwojopanrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT kuninaganaoki impactofattendingphysicianscommentsonresidentsworkloadsintheemergencydepartmentresultsfromtwojopanrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT ichikawamotohiro impactofattendingphysicianscommentsonresidentsworkloadsintheemergencydepartmentresultsfromtwojopanrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT ienagashinichiro impactofattendingphysicianscommentsonresidentsworkloadsintheemergencydepartmentresultsfromtwojopanrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT sasakiakira impactofattendingphysicianscommentsonresidentsworkloadsintheemergencydepartmentresultsfromtwojopanrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT ikegamitetsunori impactofattendingphysicianscommentsonresidentsworkloadsintheemergencydepartmentresultsfromtwojopanrandomizedcontrolledtrials