Patients may be at risk for infection, not just from contaminated hospital surfaces and centerlines, but also from their resident physicians.  A new study has found that approximately 60% of resident physicians reported for work while ill during the previous year. 

The study was conducted in 2009, and involved a total of 744 second and third year residents at 12 hospitals nationwide.  The doctors were asked whether there had been occasions where they had been sick and should have taken time off, but did not, and whether they were able to see a doctor during that time.  60% responded that they had worked sick at least once.  Second-year residents who had more experience were slightly more likely to work while sick at 62.3%.  Both men and women seemed to have the same undesirable practices.

The researchers believe that these unsafe and dangerous practices are due to “presenteeism,” a growing phenomenon in which workers continue to report to work even while they are sick.  Several studies estimate that such workers, who expose other workers to the risk of infection, cost the American workplace $150 billion a year. 

There aren't sufficient studies to determine the costs of such unhealthy practices in American hospitals.  Arizona medical malpractice lawyers know that hospitals may have more to lose than just money when doctors come in sick.  There can be a severe health impact from infections caused when doctors who are ill are in close contact with patients, who are already suffering from a weakened immune system. 

There are several reasons why residents may choose to work while sick.  Such behaviors can be seen in those doctors who are excessively dedicated to their work, or simply cannot find replacements.  There may also be the anxiety of letting down their colleagues. 

Regardless of the reasons, it is important that hospitals take the “presenteeism” phenomenon seriously, and work towards blocking such practices.  It would help if hospitals encouraged residents to take time off when they fall sick, instead of reporting to work.

A study to be published this month in the Journal of the American Medical Association indicates that babies who are delivered late or delivered early may be at a higher risk of cerebral palsy.  According to the study, babies delivered as early as 37 to 38 weeks, or as late as 42 weeks, may be at a higher risk compared to babies delivered at 40 weeks.

Researchers looked at how timing of delivery affected the risk of cerebral palsy.  They considered more than 1.68 million babies delivered between gestational ages of 37 and 44 weeks, and suffering no birth defects.  Researchers found that the risk of developing cerebral palsy was higher in babies born between 37 and 38 weeks, and at 42 weeks or later, compared to babies delivered at 40 weeks.  Since cerebral palsy can’t be diagnosed at birth, the doctors followed the babies through the next few years to monitor them.  According to the researchers, the risks seem to increase by about 44% for babies born after 40 weeks.

The margin of risk is low, and the vast majority of babies who were born a few weeks before or after 40 weeks will not develop cerebral palsy.  Researchers are now recommending that these study findings not be used as a factor when determining intervention time for delivery. 

Doctors unrelated to the study confirm that there is always a higher risk of not just cerebral palsy, but other complications too, when babies are delivered at 37 or 38 weeks, or after 42 weeks.  The risks of these complications are the reason why pre-term deliveries are not encouraged.  But if there is a medical necessity for a preterm delivery, then Arizona medical malpractice lawyers don’t believe this study's findings should be the reason why doctors postpone the delivery.