Cross-sectional survey reveals suboptimal nutrition and hydration in anaesthesiology residents, highlighting the need for structured breaks and healthier workplace food access.
BACKGROUND: Adequate nutrition and hydration during clinical workdays are essential for physicians' wellbeing, health, cognitive function, and performance. Anaesthesiology residents work in high-pressure environments that may hinder adherence to recommended dietary and fluid intake guidelines and impair their healthy eating and drinking habits. AIMS: To assess the dietary and hydration habits of anaesthesiology residents in Germany, identify workplace-related barriers, and evaluate their readiness for behavioural change. METHODS: A nationwide, cross-sectional online survey was conducted among anaesthesiology residents in German hospitals. The questionnaire assessed nutrition, hydration, food access at work, perceived barriers, and readiness for change. Descriptive and inferential analyses were applied. RESULTS: A total of 257 residents completed the survey. The majority (64%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-0.70) consumed less than the recommended five daily portions of fruit and vegetables. Sweet snacks were frequently eaten during work (68% >1x/week, 95% CI 0.62-0.73). Nearly half of female (50%) and one-third of male participants (32%) drank less than 1L per day. While most participants drank water daily at work (90%), caffeine intake was also high (56% daily). Main barriers to healthy eating included time constraints, workload, and limited food availability. Meals were not frequently skipped. Most participants (88%, P < 0.001) expressed willingness to change their dietary behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: Nutritional and hydration habits among German anaesthesiology residents were suboptimal and constrained by workplace factors. Improving access to healthy food and ensuring structured breaks may support resident wellbeing and performance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Reuter et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: