IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0228719.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Productivity, efficiency, and overall performance comparisons between attendings working solo versus attendings working with residents staffing models in an emergency department: A Large-Scale Retrospective Observational Study

Author

Listed:
  • Richard D Robinson
  • Sasha Dib
  • Daisha Mclarty
  • Sajid Shaikh
  • Radhika Cheeti
  • Yuan Zhou
  • Yasaman Ghasemi
  • Mdmamunur Rahman
  • Chet D Schrader
  • Hao Wang

Abstract

Background and objective: Attending physician productivity and efficiency can be affected when working simultaneously with Residents. To gain a better understanding of this effect, we aim to compare productivity, efficiency, and overall performance differences among Attendings working solo versus working with Residents in an Emergency Department (ED). Methods: Data were extracted from the electronic medical records of all patients seen by ED Attendings and/or Residents during the period July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2017. Attending productivity was measured based on the number of new patients enrolled per hour per provider. Attending efficiency was measured based on the provider-to-disposition time (PDT). Attending overall performance was measured by Attending Performance Index (API). Furthermore, Attending productivity, efficiency, and overall performance metrics were compared between Attendings working solo and Attendings working with Residents. The comparisons were analyzed after adjusting for confounders via propensity score matching. Results: A total of 15 Attendings and 266 Residents managing 111,145 patient encounters over the study period were analyzed. The mean (standard deviation) of Attending productivity and efficiency were 2.9 (1.6) new patients per hour and 2.7 (1.8) hours per patient for Attendings working solo, in comparison to 3.3 (1.9) and 3.0 (2.0) for Attendings working with Residents. When paired with Residents, the API decreased for those Attendings who had a higher API when working solo (average API dropped from 0.21 to 0.19), whereas API increased for those who had a lower API when working solo (average API increased from 0.13 to 0.16). Conclusion: In comparison to the Attending working solo staffing model, increased productivity with decreased efficiency occurred among Attendings when working with Residents. The overall performance of Attendings when working with Residents varied inversely against their performance when working solo.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard D Robinson & Sasha Dib & Daisha Mclarty & Sajid Shaikh & Radhika Cheeti & Yuan Zhou & Yasaman Ghasemi & Mdmamunur Rahman & Chet D Schrader & Hao Wang, 2020. "Productivity, efficiency, and overall performance comparisons between attendings working solo versus attendings working with residents staffing models in an emergency department: A Large-Scale Retrosp," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-11, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0228719
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228719
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0228719
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0228719&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0228719?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0228719. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.