Yes, because they aren't yet trained to practice medicine. Residency is where they are trained to practice medicine.
> Do they require so much supervision?
Yes, both by practicality and by law.
> If residents are just cheaper doctors
They're not "just" cheaper doctors
> then hospitals would optimize for a high resident:attending ratio.
They tried. Patients died. Now we cap both the number of hours they can work per week (80 hours/week) and the resident:attending ration.
Sources :
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2896592/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21747093
Or of course it means, that attending doctors do a constant amount of (insufficient) supervision, or they ramp up supervision after someone screws up... :|
Residents are cheaper doctors, but they are cheaper because they are less trained, less experienced doctors. They aren't equally-capable doctors with lower salary demands.
But maybe the problem is that if we would have more generalists that'd just shovel more load on the specialists.
If residents are just cheaper doctors, then hospitals would optimize for a high resident:attending ratio.
So what is it? As far as I know, in hospitals residents are really cost effective doctors. Yes, sure, they don't do the big fancy operations, but they are very capable.
It might be that hospitals have other parameters to factor in. Maybe if there would be too many residents compared to regular doctors, people would flock to other hospitals. And so on.