Evaluation of the Perceived Association Between Resident Turnover and the Outcomes of Patients Who Undergo Emergency General Surgery: Questioning the July Phenomenon | Emergency Medicine | JAMA Surgery | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 35.175.212.130. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
1.
Anderson  KL, Koval  KJ, Spratt  KF.  Hip fracture outcome: is there a “July effect”?  Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2009;38(12):606-611.PubMedGoogle Scholar
2.
Kestle  JR, Cochrane  DD, Drake  JM.  Shunt insertion in the summer: is it safe?  J Neurosurg. 2006;105(3 suppl):165-168.PubMedGoogle Scholar
3.
Inaba  K, Recinos  G, Teixeira  PG,  et al.  Complications and death at the start of the new academic year: is there a July phenomenon?  J Trauma. 2010;68(1):19-22.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Jena  AB, Sun  EC, Romley  JA.  Mortality among high-risk patients with acute myocardial infarction admitted to U.S. teaching-intensive hospitals in July: a retrospective observational study.  Circulation. 2013;128(25):2754-2763.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Barry  WA, Rosenthal  GE.  Is there a July phenomenon? the effect of July admission on intensive care mortality and length of stay in teaching hospitals.  J Gen Intern Med. 2003;18(8):639-645.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Yaghoubian  A, de Virgilio  C, Chiu  V, Lee  SL.  “July effect” and appendicitis.  J Surg Educ. 2010;67(3):157-160.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Ford  AA, Bateman  BT, Simpson  LL, Ratan  RB.  Nationwide data confirms absence of ‘July phenomenon’ in obstetrics: it’s safe to deliver in July.  J Perinatol. 2007;27(2):73-76.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Smith  ER, Butler  WE, Barker  FG  II.  Is there a “July phenomenon” in pediatric neurosurgery at teaching hospitals?  J Neurosurg. 2006;105(3 suppl):169-176.PubMedGoogle Scholar
9.
Gale  SC, Shafi  S, Dombrovskiy  VY, Arumugam  D, Crystal  JS.  The public health burden of emergency general surgery in the United States: a 10-year analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample—2001 to 2010.  J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014;77(2):202-208.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Shah  AA, Haider  AH, Zogg  CK,  et al.  National estimates of predictors of outcomes for emergency general surgery.  J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2015;78(3):482-490.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Zafar  SN, Shah  AA, Hashmi  ZG,  et al.  Outcomes after emergency general surgery at teaching vs nonteaching hospitals.  J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2015;78(1):69-76; discussion 76-77. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Shah  AA, Haider  AH, Riviello  R,  et al.  Geriatric emergency general surgery: survival and outcomes in a low-middle income country.  Surgery. 2015;158(2):562-569.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Shafi  S, Aboutanos  MB, Agarwal  S  Jr,  et al; AAST Committee on Severity Assessment and Patient Outcomes.  Emergency general surgery: definition and estimated burden of disease.  J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013;74(4):1092-1097.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
 AHA data and directories. American Hospital Association (AHA) website. http://www.aha.org/research/rc/stat-studies/data-and-directories.shtml. Accessed January 2015.
15.
D’Hoore  W, Sicotte  C, Tilquin  C.  Risk adjustment in outcome assessment: the Charlson comorbidity index.  Methods Inf Med. 1993;32(5):382-387.PubMedGoogle Scholar
17.
 Overview of Disease Severity Measures Disseminated with the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) and Kids’ Inpatient Database: Executive Summary.http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/db/nation/nis/OverviewofSeveritySystems.pdf. Published December 9, 2005. Accessed February 13, 2015.
18.
 CPI Inflation Calculator. Bureau of Labor and Statistics website. http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl. Accessed January 2015.
19.
Papandria  D, Rhee  D, Ortega  G,  et al.  Assessing trainee impact on operative time for common general surgical procedures in ACS-NSQIP.  J Surg Educ. 2012;69(2):149-155.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
Bakaeen  FG, Huh  J, LeMaire  SA,  et al.  The July effect: impact of the beginning of the academic cycle on cardiac surgical outcomes in a cohort of 70,616 patients.  Ann Thorac Surg. 2009;88(1):70-75.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
21.
Claridge  JA, Schulman  AM, Sawyer  RG, Ghezel-Ayagh  A, Young  JS.  The “July phenomenon” and the care of the severely injured patient: fact or fiction?  Surgery. 2001;130(2):346-353.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
Dhaliwal  AS, Chu  D, Deswal  A,  et al.  The July effect and cardiac surgery: the effect of the beginning of the academic cycle on outcomes.  Am J Surg. 2008;196(5):720-725.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
23.
Englesbe  MJ, Pelletier  SJ, Magee  JC,  et al.  Seasonal variation in surgical outcomes as measured by the American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP).  Ann Surg. 2007;246(3):456-462.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
24.
Schroeppel  TJ, Fischer  PE, Magnotti  LJ, Croce  MA, Fabian  TC.  The “July phenomenon”: is trauma the exception?  J Am Coll Surg. 2009;209(3):378-384.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
25.
Shuhaiber  JH, Goldsmith  K, Nashef  SA.  Impact of cardiothoracic resident turnover on mortality after cardiac surgery: a dynamic human factor.  Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;86(1):123-130.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
26.
van Rossum  CT, Shipley  MJ, Hemingway  H, Grobbee  DE, Mackenbach  JP, Marmot  MG.  Seasonal variation in cause-specific mortality: are there high-risk groups? 25-year follow-up of civil servants from the first Whitehall study.  Int J Epidemiol. 2001;30(5):1109-1116.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
27.
Englesbe  MJ, Fan  Z, Baser  O, Birkmeyer  JD.  Mortality in Medicare patients undergoing surgery in July in teaching hospitals.  Ann Surg. 2009;249(6):871-876.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
28.
Petersdorf  RG.  Health manpower: numbers, distribution, quality.  Ann Intern Med. 1975;82(5):694-701.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
29.
Kazarian  KK, Roeder  WJ, Mersheimer  WL.  Decreasing mortality and increasing morbidity from acute appendicitis.  Am J Surg. 1970;119(6):681-685.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
30.
Putnam  TC, Gagliano  N, Emmens  RW.  Appendicitis in children.  Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1990;170(6):527-532.PubMedGoogle Scholar
31.
Hardin  DM  Jr.  Acute appendicitis: review and update.  Am Fam Physician. 1999;60(7):2027-2034.PubMedGoogle Scholar
32.
Carratalà  J, Rosón  B, Fernández-Sabé  N,  et al.  Factors associated with complications and mortality in adult patients hospitalized for infectious cellulitis.  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2003;22(3):151-157.PubMedGoogle Scholar
33.
Corwin  P, Toop  L, McGeoch  G,  et al.  Randomised controlled trial of intravenous antibiotic treatment for cellulitis at home compared with hospital.  BMJ. 2005;330(7483):129.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
34.
Carter  K, Kilburn  S, Featherstone  P.  Cellulitis and treatment: a qualitative study of experiences.  Br J Nurs. 2007;16(6):S22-S24, S26-S28. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Original Investigation
March 2016

Evaluation of the Perceived Association Between Resident Turnover and the Outcomes of Patients Who Undergo Emergency General Surgery: Questioning the July Phenomenon

Author Affiliations
  • 1Center for Surgery and Public Health, Harvard Medical School and Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
  • 2Division of General Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
JAMA Surg. 2016;151(3):217-224. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2015.3940
Abstract

Importance  The influx of new surgical residents and interns at the beginning of the academic year is assumed to be associated with poor outcomes. Referred to as the July phenomenon, this occurrence has been anecdotally associated with increases in the frequency of medical errors due to intern inexperience. Studies in various surgical specialties provide conflicting results.

Objective  To determine whether an association between the July phenomenon and outcomes exists among a nationally representative sample of patients who underwent emergency general surgery (EGS).

Design, Setting, and Participants  Retrospective analysis of data from the 2007-2011 Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Data on adult patients (≥16 years of age) presenting to teaching hospitals with a principal diagnosis of an EGS condition, as defined by the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma, were retrospectively analyzed. The patients who were included in our study were dichotomized into early (July-August) vs late (September-June) management. The original analyses were conducted in March 2015.

Main Outcomes and Measures  Risk-adjusted multivariable regression based on calculated propensity scores was assessed for associations with differences in in-hospital mortality, complications, length of stay, and total hospital cost.

Results  A total of 1 433 528 patients who underwent EGS were included, weighted to represent 7 095 045 patients from 581 teaching hospitals nationwide; 17.6% were managed early. Relative to patients managed later, early patients had marginally lower risk-adjusted odds of mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.96 [95% CI, 0.92-0.99]), complications (OR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.96-0.99]), and developing a secondary EGS condition (OR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.97-0.98]). Length of stay and total hospital cost were comparable between the 2 groups (P > .05).

Conclusions and Relevance  Contrary to expectations, the EGS patients who were managed early fared equally well, if not better, than the EGS patients who were managed later. Potentially attributable to increased manpower and/or hypervigilance on the part of supervising senior residents or attending physicians, the results suggest that concerns among EGS patients related to the July phenomenon are unfounded.

×