PT3.S2.Q14 - Physicians training

isdmyungisdmyung Member
edited February 2021 in Logical Reasoning 121 karma

Stimulus (paraphrased)
Pamela: physicians in training work long, up to 36 hours, shifts and that fatigue impairs their ability to make the best medical decisions during final portions of their shift.
Quincy: Thousands of physicians have gone through this regiment with records to show that the system works. So why change now?

Though I realize I need to work in the stimulus to pick my answers, as someone who has worked shifts before, I know that your relief does not generally show up generously early. So if these physicians work up to 36 hours, they are in the long haul and that fatigue can be a very real risk to decision making towards the end.

Anyways, with everything in mind above, I was left with AC B vs C.
I picked AC C because of my influence from experience...hear me out: emergency-room patients needing continuity of physician care over the critical period after admission, generally 24 hours, would seem as though at any given crucial moment, the expectation would that a physician is able to make the best medical decisions. In the event where there is not a generous overlap between turnovers from one shift to the next, that leaves patients in critical conditions reliant on potentially fatigued physicians that are towards the end of their 36 hour shift. That is why I thought, this would be enough to counter Quincy's argument. Yes, the physicians do need to better working conditions to minimize fatigue that could impair medical decisions.

Meanwhile, AC B has me understanding it as there will be more seriously ill patients during their stay at the hospital than before. I felt like I had to draw an inference on this one. While not everyone in an emergency room may not be in a life threatening state, I guess AC B paints a better picture with more people requiring more attention and the need for best medical decisions??

Please help

Comments

  • kyopoyurikyopoyuri Live Member
    50 karma

    Pamela argues that the long hours of physician training is unsustainable.
    Quincy argues that it has worked well in the past, so there is no need to change it.

    B gives us a reason to believe that there IS a good reason to change the status quo, because the situation has fundamentally changed from the past. Keeping physicians up for long hours was acceptable then, but now that patients are more ill, then maybe outcomes will be drastically worse if the problem of overworked physicians is not solved.

    C suggests that the current situation where physicians work for up to 36 hours straight is still compatible with this standard of continuous 24 hour care since it fits well within that window. This also doesn't touch Quincy's objection at all - why should something that has worked in the past be changed?

  • isdmyungisdmyung Member
    121 karma

    When you explain it like that, I can clearly see why C is wrong. Thank you

Sign In or Register to comment.