Sleep and Cognition Laboratory, Centre for Sleep and Cognition, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Department of Paediatrics, Khoo Teck Puat-National University Children's Medical Institute, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore.
JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Oct 1;7(10):e2438350. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.38350.
Extended work hours and night shifts are essential in health care, but negatively affect physician sleep, well-being, and patient care. Alternative schedules with shorter work hours and/or reduced irregularity might mitigate these issues.
To compare sleep, well-being, and cognition between interns working irregular, extended shifts (call schedule), and those working a more regular schedule with restricted hours (float schedule).
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this observational longitudinal cohort study, interns in a Singapore-based teaching hospital were studied for 8 weeks from January 2022 to July 2023. Data were analyzed from July 2023 to July 2024.
Participants worked either regular approximately 10-hour workdays, interspersed with 24 hour or more overnight calls 4 to 5 times a month, or a float schedule, which included regular approximately 10-hour workdays, and 5 to 7 consecutive approximately 12-hour night shifts every 2 months. Exposure was based on departmental training and operational needs.
Sleep was measured with wearable sleep trackers and an electronic diary. Day-to-day well-being and cognitive assessments were collected through a smartphone application. Assessments included the Sleep Regularity Index (SRI; determines the probability of an individual being in the same state [sleep or wake] at any 2 time points 24 hours apart, with 0 indicating highly random sleep patterns and 100 denoting perfect regularity) and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Inventory (PSQI; scores ranges from 0 to 21, with higher scores indicating poorer sleep; a score greater than 5 suggests significant sleep difficulties).
Participants (mean [SD] age, 24.7 [1.1] years; 57 female participants [59.4%]; 41 on call schedule [42.7%]; 55 on float schedule [57.3%]) provided 4808 nights of sleep (84.2%) and 3390 days (59.3%) of well-being and cognition assessments. Participants on a float schedule had higher SRI scores (mean [SD] score, 69.4 [6.16]) and had better quality sleep (PSQI mean [SD] score, 5.4 [2.3]), than participants on call schedules (SRI mean [SD] score, 56.1 [11.3]; t91 = 6.81; mean difference, 13.3; 95% CI, 9.40 to 17.22; P < .001; PSQI mean [SD] score, 6.5 [2.3]; t79 = 2.16; 95% CI, 0.09 to 2.15; P = .03). Overnight call shifts, but not night float shifts, were associated with poorer mood (-13%; β = -6.79; 95% CI, -9.32 to -4.27; P < .001), motivation (-21%; β = -10.09; 95% CI, -12.55 to -7.63; P < .001), and sleepiness ratings (29%; β = 15.96; 95% CI, 13.01 to 18.90; P < .001) and impaired vigilance (21 ms slower; β = 20.68; 95% CI, 15.89 to 25.47; P < .001) compared with regular day shifts. Night shifts with naps were associated with better vigilance (16 ms faster; β = -15.72; 95% CI, -28.27 to -3.17; P = .01) than nights without naps.
In this cohort study, 24-hour call schedules were associated with poorer sleep, well-being, and cognition outcomes than float schedules. Naps during night shifts benefited vigilance in both schedules.
延长工作时间和夜班是医疗保健的必要条件,但会影响医生的睡眠、健康和患者护理。较短的工作时间和/或减少不规则性的替代时间表可能会缓解这些问题。
比较不规则、延长轮班(值班制)和更规律、工作时间受限(轮班制)的实习生的睡眠、健康和认知。
设计、地点和参与者:在这项基于观察的纵向队列研究中,从 2022 年 1 月至 2023 年 7 月对新加坡一家教学医院的实习医生进行了为期 8 周的研究。数据分析于 2023 年 7 月至 2024 年 7 月进行。
参与者要么按照常规工作大约 10 小时,每隔 4 到 5 次,每月工作 24 小时或更长时间的夜间轮班,要么按照轮班制工作,包括大约 10 小时的常规工作和每隔 2 个月大约 12 小时的连续 5 到 7 个夜间轮班。暴露情况基于部门培训和运营需求。
睡眠使用可穿戴睡眠追踪器和电子日记进行测量。通过智能手机应用程序每天收集健康和认知评估。评估包括睡眠规律指数(SRI;确定个体在 24 小时内任意 2 个时间点处于相同状态(睡眠或清醒)的可能性,0 表示高度随机的睡眠模式,100 表示完美的规律)和匹兹堡睡眠质量指数(PSQI;得分范围从 0 到 21,得分越高表示睡眠质量越差;得分大于 5 表示存在显著的睡眠困难)。
参与者(平均[标准差]年龄,24.7[1.1]岁;57 名女性参与者[59.4%];41 名值班制参与者[42.7%];55 名轮班制参与者[57.3%])提供了 4808 个夜晚的睡眠(84.2%)和 3390 天的健康和认知评估(59.3%)。轮班制的参与者的 SRI 评分(平均[标准差]得分,69.4[6.16])更高,睡眠质量更好(PSQI 平均[标准差]得分,5.4[2.3]),比值班制的参与者更好(SRI 平均[标准差]得分,56.1[11.3];t91=6.81;平均差异,13.3;95%置信区间,9.40 到 17.22;P<0.001;PSQI 平均[标准差]得分,6.5[2.3];t79=2.16;95%置信区间,0.09 到 2.15;P=0.03)。夜间轮班,而不是夜间轮班,与较差的情绪(-13%;β=-6.79;95%置信区间,-9.32 至-4.27;P<0.001)、动机(-21%;β=-10.09;95%置信区间,-12.55 至-7.63;P<0.001)和嗜睡评分(29%;β=15.96;95%置信区间,13.01 至 18.90;P<0.001)以及警觉性受损(21 毫秒更慢;β=20.68;95%置信区间,15.89 至 25.47;P<0.001)有关,与常规日班相比。夜间轮班时小睡与警觉性提高(快 16 毫秒;β=-15.72;95%置信区间,-28.27 至-3.17;P=0.01)有关,而夜间无小睡则无此效果。
在这项队列研究中,24 小时值班制与较差的睡眠、健康和认知结果有关,而轮班制则无此情况。夜间轮班时小睡有助于提高两种轮班制度下的警觉性。