A Pilot Study Using Nominal Group Technique to Assess Residents’ Perceptions of Successful Attending Rounds

BACKGROUND  Ward attending rounds are fundamental for internal medicine residency training. An improved understanding of interns’ and residents’ perceptions of attending rounds should inform training programs and attending physicians. OBJECTIVES  The aim of this study was to assess residents’ perceptions of successful attending rounds. DESIGN  We convened two groups of interns and two groups of residents, to elicit their perceptions on attending rounds. SUBJECTS  Participants were recruited by e-mail and conference announcements from the 49 interns and 80 residents in the internal medicine and medicine-pediatrics residency programs. MEASUREMENTS  The nominal group technique (NGT) uses a structured group process to elicit and prioritize answers to a carefully articulated question. MAIN RESULTS  Seven interns (14%) identified 27 success factors and ranked attending approachability and enthusiasm and high quality teaching as most important. A second group of six (12%) interns identified 40 detractors and ranked having “mean attendings,” receiving disrespectful comments, and too long or too short rounds as the most significant detractors. Nine (11%) residents identified 32 success factors and ranked attention to length of rounds, house staff autonomy, and establishing goals/expectations as the most important success factors. A second group of six (8%) residents identified 34 detractors and ranked very long rounds, interruptions and time constraints, and poor rapport between team members as the most significant detractors). CONCLUSIONS  Although there was some overlap in interns’ and residents’ perceptions of attending rounds, interns identified interpersonal factors as the most important factors; whereas residents viewed structural factors as most important. These findings should assist attending physicians improve the way they conduct rounds targeting both interns and residents needs. Presented in part at the Southern Regional Meeting of the Society of General Internal Medicine in New Orleans, LA, in February 2005 and the Society of General Internal Medicine Annual Meeting in New Orleans, LA, in May 2005.     

Measuring attending physician performance in a general medicine outpatient clinic

OBJECTIVE: To determine which aspects of outpatient attending physician performance (e.g., clinical ability, teaching ability, interpersonal conduct) were measurable and separable by resident report. DESIGN: Self-administered evaluation form. SETTING: University internal medicine resident continuity clinic. PARTICIPANTS: All residents with their continuity clinic at the university hospital evaluated the two attendings who staffed their clinic for the academic years of 1990–1991, 1991–1992, and 1992–1993 (average of 85 total residents per year). The overall response rate was 74%. ANALYSIS: Exploratory analyses were conducted on a preliminary evaluation form in the first two years of the study (236 evaluations of 20 different clinic attendings) and confirmatory analyses using factor analysis and generalizability analysis were performed on the third year’s data (142 evaluations of 15 different clinic attendings). Analysis of variance was used to evaluate factors associated with evaluation scores. RESULTS: Analyses demonstrated that the residents did not distinguish between the attendings’ clinical and teaching abilities, resulting in a single four-item scale that was named the Clinical/Teaching Excellence Scale, measured on a five-point scale from poor to outstanding (Cronbach’s alpha=0.92). A large amount of the variance for this scale score was associated with attending identity (adjusted R²=46%). However, two alternative approaches to evaluating the performance of the attending (preference for him or her to the “average” attending and perceived impact of the attending on residents’ clinical skills) did not provide useful information independent of the Clinical/Teaching Excellence Scale. The ratings of three separate conduct scales [availability in clinic (Availability Scale), treating residents and patients with respect (Respect Scale), and time efficiency in staffing cases (Slow Staffing Scale)] were separable from each other and from the rating of clinical/teaching excellence. For the Clinical/Teaching Excellent Scale, as few as four evaluations produced good interrater reliability and eight evaluations produced excellent reliability (reliability coefficients were 0.70 and 0.84, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although this evaluation instrument for measuring clinic attending performance must be considered preliminary, this study suggests that relatively few attending evaluations are required to reliably profile an individual attending’s performance, that attending identity is associated with a large amount of the scale score variation, and that special issues of attending performance more relevant to the outpatient setting than the inpatient setting (availability in clinic and sensitivity to time efficiency) should be considered when evaluating clinic attending performance. Presented in part at the annual meeting of the Society of General Internal Medicine, Washington, DC, April 29, 1994.     

Internal medicine housestaff and attending physician perceptions of the impact of the New York State section 405 regulations on working conditions and supervision of residents in two training programs

Objectives: To assess the attitudes of internal medicine housestaff and their attending physicians regarding the impact of the reduction in on-call working hours and increased supervision mandated in New York by a revision of the State Health Code (Section 405). Design: Survey of senior medical housestaff and attendings two years after the adoption of the mandated changes. Setting: Two independent medicine housestaff training programs of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the Bronx, New York. Participants: Fifty-three percent of third- and fourth-year residents (n=79) and 60% of voluntary and full-time attendings (n=266) responded. Measurements: A factor analysis of 13 variables that appeared on both versions of the survey identified two interpretable factors. A multivariate analysis of variance compared responses to each factor by group and by campus, and Bonferroni post-hoc comparisons analyzed the items within factors. Chi-square analyses compared responses of residents and attendings to the open-ended questions. Results: Significant differences between the housestaff and attendings groups were found for all fixed-response items (minimum p<0.05 for all analyses), but both groups agreed that the regulations had a positive impact on resident attitudes regarding the demands on their time. Both groups were also uncertain whether the new regulations had a beneficial effect on the choice of internal medicine as a career, the quality of resident supervision, and residents’ intellectual interest in challenging medical problems. Whereas residents agreed that the regulations diminished their fatigue, had no impact on their ability to observe the full impact of interventions on patients, and resulted in better patient care, attendings were uncertain or disagreed. While attendings agreed that the regulations had caused a shift-work mentality among residents, housestaff were uncertain. Conclusions: Housestaff had more positive attitudes about the impact of the mandated changes in working conditions for residents than did attending physicians in the same institutions. The major benefits seen by residents were less fatigue and more spare time. There was no consensus about whether these changes had a positive impact on internal medicine practice and clinical supervision. There was some concern that a shift-work mentality is developing among residents and that continuity of patient care has suffered. Thus, despite some substantial benefits, Section 405 may not be achieving its goals of improving resident supervision and the quality of patient care by houseofficers. Received from the Departments of Medicine and Epidemiology and Social Medicine, and the Office of Educational Research and Evaluation, the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York. An abstract of this paper was presented at the Research in Medical Education Conference, Association of American Medical Colleges, New Orleans, Louisiana, November 10–11, 1992.     

The Return of Bedside Rounds: An Educational Intervention

Background

Bedside rounds have decreased in frequency on teaching services. Perceived barriers toward bedside rounds are inefficiency and patient and house staff lack of preference for this mode of rounding.

Objectives

To evaluate the impact of a bedside rounding intervention on the frequency of bedside rounding, duration of patient encounters and rounding sessions, and patient and resident attitudes toward bedside rounds.

Design

A pre- and postintervention design, with a bedside rounding workshop midway through two consecutive internal medicine rotations, with daily resident interviews, patient surveys, and an end-of-the-year survey given to all Medicine house staff.

Participants

Medicine house staff and medicine patients.

Measures

Frequency of bedside rounds, duration of new patient encounters and rounding sessions, and patient and house staff attitudes regarding bedside rounds.

Results

Forty-four residents completed the bedside rounding workshop. Comparing the preintervention and postintervention phases, bedside rounds increased from <1% to 41% (p < 0.001). The average duration of walk rounding encounters was 16 min, and average duration of bedside rounding encounters was 15 min (p = 0.42). Duration of rounds was 95 and 98 min, respectively (p = 0.52). Patients receiving bedside rounds preferred bedside rounds (99% vs. 83%, p = 0.03) and perceived more time spent at the bedside by their team (p < 0.001). One hundred twelve house staff (71%) responded, with 73% reporting that bedside rounds are better for patient care. House staff performing bedside rounds were less likely to believe that bedside rounds were more educational (53% vs. 78%, p = 0.01).

Conclusions

Bedside rounding increased after an educational intervention, and the time to complete bedside rounding encounters was similar to alternative forms of rounding. Patients preferred bedside rounds and perceived more time spent at the bedside when receiving bedside rounds. Medicine residents performing bedside rounds were less likely to believe bedside rounds were more educational, but all house staff valued the importance of bedside rounding for the delivery of patient care.KEY WORDS: bedside rounds, medical education, patient care     

What do attending physicians contribute in a house officer-based ambulatory continuity clinic?

OBJECTIVE: To study the educational contributions of attending physicians in an internal medicine house staff ambulatory clinic. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, self-administered survey. SETTING: University-affiliated general internal medicine practice. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Internal medicine residents and attendings. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Attending and resident perceptions of whether attendings made contributions to teaching points, diagnosis (DX), therapy (RX), and health care maintenance (HCM) were assessed in 428 patient encounters. Resident assessments significantly exceeded attending self-assessments of contributions to teaching points (82% vs 74%, P=.001), DX (44% vs 34%, P=.001), RX (61% vs 55%, P=.02), and HCM (19% vs 15%, P=.04). Both residents and attendings perceived that contributions declined progressively with increasing resident year (P<.05). Primary care and categorical residents assessed attending contributions comparably. However, attendings perceived contributing more to RX and HCM for categorical residents than primary care (P<.05). Male and female residents assessed attending contributions comparably. However, attendings perceived contributing generally more to DX in male residents than female (P=.003). In 8% of encounters, either residents or attendings felt that patient evaluation by the attending was needed. In these encounters with personal patient evaluation by attendings, both residents and attendings felt that attendings made more contributions to DX (P=.001) and teaching points than in other encounters. CONCLUSIONS: Attending physicians consistently underestimate their perceived contributions to house officer ambulatory teaching. Their personal patient evaluation increases assistance with DX and teaching points. Given perceived declining contributions by training year, attendings may need to identify other teaching strategies for interactions with senior residents.     

The positive impact of initiation of hospitalist clinician educators

OBJECTIVE: Although hospitalists have been shown to improve both financial and educational outcomes, their ability to manage dual roles as clinicians and educators has been infrequently demonstrated, particularly in the community setting where large numbers of residents train. We evaluated the impact of hospitalists on financial and educational outcomes at a mid-sized community teaching hospital 1 year after implementation. DESIGN: Two hospitalist clinician educators (HCEs) were hired to provide inpatient medical care while participating in resident education. Length of stay and cost per case data were calculated for all patients admitted to the hospitalist service during their first year and compared with patients admitted to private physicians. The hospitalists' top 11 discharge diagnoses were individually assessed. For the same time period, categorical medicine residents (N = 36) were given an anonymous written survey to assess the HCEs' impact on resident education and service. RESULTS: Resource consumption: length of stay was reduced by 20.8% and total cost per case was reduced by 18.4% comparing the HCEs with community-based physicians. Reductions in both length of stay and cost per case were noted for 8 of the 11 most common discharge diagnoses. Resident survey: over 75% of residents responded, with all noting improvement in the quality of attending rounds, bedside teaching, and the overall inpatient experience. Residents' roles as teachers and team leaders were largely unchanged. CONCLUSION: Hospitalist clinician educators as inpatient teaching attendings effectively reduce length of stay and resource utilization while improving resident education at community-based teaching hospitals.     

Evaluation of the seminar method to improve clinical teaching

The effects of a seminar method to improve the teaching of ward attending physicians were evaluated. Forty-six attending physicians from four institutions were randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. The method was evaluated to assess its effects on attending physicians’ performances and attitudes, and impact on learners. Evaluation methods included ratings of videotapes of ward rounds, teachers’ subjective assessments of both their teaching performances and their experiences in the study, and trainee ratings. Videotape ratings, the teachers’ own assessments, and the trainees’ assessments of the attending physicians’ impact on learning were significantly different, favoring the experimental group (p<0.05). It is concluded that the seminar method can provide the basis for effective and feasible approaches for improving clinical teaching by attending physicians. Received from Stanford University Medical Center and Palo Alto Veterans Administration Medical Center. Supported by the National Fund for Medical Education, the Veterans Administration, and the Kaiser Foundation Research Institute.     

An observational study of attending rounds

The authors conducted an observational study of attending rounds to determine the current status of this form of clinical teaching in a university-based internal medicine department. Using two forms of measurement, questionnaires and timed observations, we found that 63% of attending physician time was spent in the conference room, 26% in hallways, and only 11% at the bedside. Significant differences were found between estimated and actual times, particularly in discussing previously admitted patients, patient interactions, data reviews, topic presentations, and the category of “other” activities. These results provide a framework for appraising attending rounds and identifying areas that may be improved with a teaching workshop intervention. Presented at the Mountain West Regional Meeting of the Society of General Internal Medicine, Sante Fe, New Mexico, March 6, 1992. Supported by the Biomedical Research Support Grant Committee, Grant No.BRSG (2S07 RR05675-22).     

Who gets repeat screening mammography

To determine rates of, and explore physician factors associated with, repeat mammography, administrative data for 791 women aged 50 years and older were examined. Three-fourths of the women (73%) received repeat mammography (i.e., a second mammogram was obtained within six to 18 months of the first). Provider factors associated with higher repeat mammography rates were: being a woman, practicing in the women’s health group rather than the general internal medicine service, and being a fellow or an attending physician (p-values <0.01). Patients of women attendings/fellows had higher repeat mammography rates than did those of men attendings/fellows, men residents, and women residents. Characteristics (gender, level of training) of providers strongly influence their patients’ screening behavior. Presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Health Services Research, Washington, DC, June 27–29. 1993. Supported by American Cancer Society Individual Institutional Research Grant, #IRG-97P.     

Patient satisfaction in resident and attending ambulatory care clinics

OBJECTIVE: To measure and compare patient satisfaction with care in resident and attending physician internal medicine ambulatory care clinics. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey using a questionnaire derived from the Visit-Specific Satisfaction Questionnaire (VSQ) and Patient Satisfaction Index (PSI) distributed from March 1998 to May 1998. SETTING: Four clinics based at a university teaching hospital and the associated Veterans' Affairs (VA) hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred eighty-eight patients of 76 resident and 25 attending physicians. RESULTS: Patients of resident physicians at the university site were more likely to be African American, male, have lower socioeconomic status and have lower physical and mental health scores on the Short Form-12 than patients of university attendings. Patients of resident and attending physicians at the VA site were similar. In multivariate analyses, patients of university attending physicians were more likely to be highly satisfied than patients of university residents on the VSQ-Physician (odds ratio [OR], 3.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6 to 7.8) and the PSI-Physician (OR, 10.1; 95% CI, 3.7 to 27.4) summary scores. Differences were not seen on the summary scores at the VA site. Two individual items displayed significant differences between residents and attendings at both sites: "personal manner (courtesy, respect, sensitivity, friendliness) of the doctor" (P 相似文献   

A Comparison of the Willingness of Resident and Attending Physicians to Comply with the Requests of Patients at the End of Life

Background

Little is known about the differences between physicians in training and post training in their willingness to comply with patient requests at the end of life.

Objective

To compare the attitudes of attendings and residents regarding a range of patient requests at the end of life

Design

Written, cross-sectional survey

Participants

The cohort included 191 attendings randomly selected across the state of Connecticut and 240 residents from 2 university-affiliated Internal Medicine programs.

Main Measures

We surveyed attendings and residents about their willingness to honor the requests of the same decisionally capable elderly patient in five scenarios involving different requests regarding end-of-life treatment.

Results

While a large majority of both attendings and residents were willing to comply with each of the requests to withhold intubation (100 % and 94 %, respectively), to extubate (92 % and 77 %), and to give increasingly higher doses of narcotics (94 % and 71 %), a significantly larger proportion of attendings versus residents was willing to comply with each of these requests. Small proportions of attendings and residents were willing to prescribe a lethal amount of sleeping pills (3 % and 5 %, respectively) and to give a lethal injection in its current illegal state (1 % and 4 %). A significantly larger proportion of residents (32 %) compared to attendings (19 %) was willing to give a lethal injection if legal. Adjusting for sociodemographic factors, attending status was independently associated with willingness to extubate [adjusted odds ratio (AOR)?=?3.0, 95 % CI?=?1.6-5.7] and to give a lethal injection if legal (AOR?=?0.5, 95 % CI?=?0.3-0.8). The proportion of physicians willing to extubate increased across years since graduation, with the greatest differences occurring across the residency years (69 % to 86 %).

Conclusions and Relevance

Clinical experience was an important determinant of physicians’ willingness to perform multiple patient requests at the end of life, with substantial changes in attitudes occurring during residency training. More research is needed to determine whether dedicated clinical exposure for physicians in training influences attitudes.     

Actual and potential effects of medical resident coverage on reimbursement for inpatient visits by attending physicians

CONTEXT: The impact of residents on hospital finance has been studied; there are no data describing the economic effect of residents on attending physicians. OBJECTIVE: In a community teaching hospital, we compared allowable inpatient visit codes and payments (based on documentation in the daily progress notes) between a general medicine teaching unit and nonteaching general medicine units. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review, matched cohort study. SETTING: Six hundred fifty-bed community teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Patients were discharged July 1998 through February 1999 from Saint Barnabas Medical Center. We randomly selected 200 patients in quartets. Each quartet consisted of a pair of patients cared for by residents and a pair cared for only by an attending physician. In each pair, 1 of the patients was under the care of an attending physician who usually admitted to the teaching service, and 1 was under the care of a usually nonteaching attending. Within each quartet, patients were matched for diagnosis-related group, length of stay, and discharge date. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We assigned the highest daily visit code justifiable by resident and attending chart documentation, determining relative value units (RVUs) and reimbursements allowed by each patient's insurance company. RESULTS: Although more seriously ill, teaching-unit patients generated a mean 1.75 RVUs daily, compared with 1.84 among patients discharged from nonteaching units (P =.3). Median reimbursement, daily and per hospitalization, was similar on teaching and nonteaching units. Nonteaching attendings documented higher mean daily RVUs than teaching attendings (1.83 vs 1.76, P =.2). Median allowable reimbursements were $267 per case ($53 daily) among teaching attendings compared with $294 per case ($58 daily) among nonteaching attendings (Z = 1.54, P =.1). When only the resident note was considered, mean daily RVUs increased 39% and median allowable dollars per day 27% (Z = 4.21, P <.001). CONCLUSIONS: Nonteaching attendings appear to document their visits more carefully from a billing perspective than do teaching attendings. Properly counter-documented, resident notes could substantially increase payments to attending physicians.     

The association between residents’ work-rounds styles and the process and outcome of medical care

Objective: To determine whether the manner in which residents conduct work rounds is associated with the adequacy of their care processes and the outcomes of their patients. Methods: Two types of data were collected: time and motion data for residents (n=12) during work rounds, and clinical and outcome data for the patients they cared for during the observation period (n=211). Five residents were classified as data gatherers because they spent twice as much time gathering clinical data about their patients as they spent engaging in other activities. Three physicians blinded to the resident’s identity rated the quality of the care process and assessed the frequency of undesirable events occurring during the stay and after discharge. Results: A data-gathering style was associated with higher quality of care as judged by both process and outcomes. The data gatherers were more likely to comply with the “stability of medications before discharge” criterion (86% of the data gatherers’ cases vs 73% of others’, p=0.07), and their patients were less likely to have unanticipated problems, in that fewer required calls from nurses (20% vs 37%, p<0.01) and visits by on-call housestaff (33% vs 50%, p=0.01). The data gatherers’ patients were less likely to be readmitted within 30 days (14% vs 38%, p<0.01). Conclusions: A data-gathering work-rounds style is associated with better process and outcome. Residency programs should provide formal instruction to trainees in the conduct of work rounds. Received from the General Medicine Section, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. Presented in poster form at the annual meeting of the Society of General Internal Medicine, Arlington, Virginia, April 28–30, 1993. Supported in part by the Houston Center for Quality of Care and Utilization Studies, a Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Field Program.     

Bedside case presentations

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine current attitudes of patients, medical students, housestaff, and clinical faculty toward bedside case presentations. DESIGN: Survey using multiple-choice questionnaire and open comments for students, housestaff, and faculty, and a structured interview of patients. SETTING: Major teaching hospitals on the campus of a midwestern medical school, staffed by full-time faculty. PARTICIPANTS: 136 medical students, 58 housestaff, 66 faculty, and 73 patients. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: 85% of patients liked the case presentation discussion at the bedside, but 95% of both students and housestaff felt more comfortable with such discussion away from the patient. Attending faculty were about evenly divided in preference, with the younger staff preferring the conference room setting. Most patients (88%) opposed rounds in the hallway. Duration of rounds of one to two hours was felt desirable by most, but 50% of students preferred a duration of less than one hour. For length of new patient case presentation, 60% of learners again favored brevity, less than 5 minutes. CONCLUSIONS: Bedside rounds are an opportunity to sharpen diagnostic skills and to demonstrate the art of medicine. They are undervalued by learners and younger faculty but appreciated by patients. The authors recommend that faculty improve bedside rounds by assessing team members' educational needs, by cultivating sensitivity and respect for the needs of all parties, and by assuring pertinence and brevity of bedside discussion.     

The on-call experience of interns in internal medicine. Medical Education Task Force of Henry Ford Hospital

As part of an effort to examine the structure and content of our residency program in internal medicine, we assessed interns' activities on call to identify problems with workload scheduling, supervision, or learning. Eleven interns were observed continuously during a 34-hour on-call period. Interns averaged 5.6 hours at the bedside, with 57 minutes of that time under direct supervision of a resident or attending physician. Nearly half of new patient examinations continued after midnight despite a special night admission team that evaluated all patients admitted after 11 pm. The interns averaged 21 beeps per 30 hours. They slept an average of 2.5 hours with two interruptions. They read about their patients an average of 4 minutes during the 34-hour period. Most supervision was away from the bedside (82/139 minutes). Bedside supervision occurred predominantly during rounds (45/57 minutes). Attending physicians averaged only 12 minutes of bedside interaction with the intern. Many of these findings were unanticipated. Structural defects in the training program were defined and are being addressed. Other training programs should consider similar analyses before making fundamental changes.     

Medical students’ perceptions of the elements of effective inpatient teaching by attending physicians and housestaff

BACKGROUND: Most studies of effective inpatient teaching have focused on teaching by attending physicians. OBJECTIVE: To identify and compare medical students' perceptions of behaviors associated with teaching effectiveness of attending physicians and housestaff (residents and interns). DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Third-year students who spent 4 weeks on a general internal medicine inpatient service during academic year 2003-2004 completed surveys using a 5-point Likert-type scale. Students evaluated numerous teaching behaviors of attendings and housestaff and then evaluated their overall teaching effectiveness. MEASUREMENTS: Each behavior was correlated with the perceived teaching effectiveness in univariate and regression analyses. RESULTS: Seventy-two students were taught by 23 attendings and 73 housestaff. Of 144 possible teaching evaluations, they completed 142 (98.6%) for attendings and 128 (88.9%) for housestaff. The mean rating for perceived teaching effectiveness was 4.48 (SD 0.82) for attendings and 4.39 (SD 0.80) for housestaff. For attending physicians, teaching effectiveness correlated most strongly with enthusiasm for teaching (R(2)=63.6%) but was also associated with inspiring confidence in knowledge and skills, providing feedback, and encouraging students to accept increasing responsibility. Housestaff teaching effectiveness correlated most strongly with providing a role model (R(2)=61.8%) but was also associated with being available to students, performing effective patient education, inspiring confidence in knowledge and skills, and showing enthusiasm for teaching. Regression models explained 79.7% and 73.6% of the variance in evaluations of attendings and housestaff, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Students' perceptions of effective teaching behaviors differ for attending physicians and housestaff, possibly reflecting differences in teaching roles or methods.     

Time analysis of a general medicine service

Objective: To describe a novel method of time analysis for health care settings by quantifying internal medicine housestaff’s work activities and contacts. Design: Observational work sampling study based on random sampling technique. Setting: General medicine service in a university hospital. Participants: All housestaff (18 interns, 18 residents) rotating through the general medicine service during a 12-week period. Main outcome measures: Proportion of time spent doing 22 work activities and proportion of time spent with 13 work contacts, reported separately for interns and residents and for on-call days and off-call days. Results: The authors sampled 6,599 unique time observations (3,533 from on-call days, 3,066 from off-call days) during 193 housestaff workdays. The housestaff spent a majority of their time engaged in direct patient care activities (81% of the interns’ workdays, and 64.5% of the residents’ workdays), primarily in patient evaluation and follow-up (48% of the interns’ and 39% of the residents’ workdays). Compared with the interns, the residents spent relatively more time in direct educational activities (conferences, reading, teaching): 27% of the residents’ workdays versus 10% of the interns’ workdays. Analysis of work contacts showed that the housestaff spent a large portion of the workday alone: 27% of the residents’ and 34% of the interns’ workdays. The housestaff also spent a large portion of the workday with attending physicians: 23% of the residents’ and 11% of the interns’ workdays. This translates into 21 hours/week of attending supervision for the residents and 10 hours/week for the interns. Conclusions: Using random work sampling, the authors found that the vast majority of the houseofficer’s workday was spent in direct patient care. This method of time analysis may be used to describe housestaff training and supervision, as well as to evaluate administrative interventions designed to change housestaff work experience. Presented at the annual meeting of the Society of General Internal Medicine, Washington, DC, April 29, 1993. Supported in part by the A. W. Mellon Foundation. Dr. Oddone is supported by the VA Health Services Research career development program.