Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The doctor will see you shortly

The ethical significance of time for the patient-physician relationship

  • Health Policy
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many physicians and health care leaders express concern about the amount of time available for clinical practice. While debates rage on about how much time is truly available, the perception that time is inadequate is now pervasive. This perception has ethical significance, because it may cause clinicians to forego activities and behaviors that promote important aspects of the patient-physician relationship, to shortcut shared decision making, and to fall short of obligations to act as patient advocates. Furthermore, perceived time constraints can hinder the just distribution of physician time. Although creating more time in the clinical encounter would certainly address these ethical concerns, specific strategies—many of which do not take significantly more time—can effectively change the perception that time is inadequate. These approaches are critical for clinicians and health systems to maintain their ethical commitments and simultaneously deal with the realities of time.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Arnold E, Pulich M. Improving productivity through more effective time management. Health Care Manag (Frederick). 2004;23:65–70.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Crosby JW. Ten time-management tips for family physicians. CMAJ. 2004;170:949–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lussier MT, Richard C. Doctor-patient communication: taking time to save time. Can Fam Physician. 2004;50:1087–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. McClennan B. Achieving greater patient throughput. Am J Roentgenol. 2004;183(3 suppl):9.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Phipps GS. Seven keys to on-time finishing. J Clin Orthod. 2004;38:155–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Waters DA. The 15-minute appointment: sacred cow? Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2004;158:603.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Guglielmo WJ. How to set up a concierge practice. Med Econ. 2003;80:64–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Stafford RS, Saglam D, Causino N, et al. Trends in adult visits to primary care physicians in the United States. Arch Fam Med. 1999;8:26–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Mechanic D, McAlpine DD, Rosenthal M. Are patients’ office visits with physicians getting shorter? N Engl J Med. 2001;344:198–204.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Linzer M, Konrad TR, Douglas J, et al. Managed care, time pressure, and physician job satisfaction: results from the physician worklife study [see comments]. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15:441–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Tocher TM, Larson EB. Do physicians spend more time with non-English-speaking patients? [see comments]. J Gen Intern Med. 1999;14:303–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Burdi MD, Baker LC. Physicians’ perceptions of autonomy and satisfaction in California. Health Aff (Millwood). 1999;18:134–45.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Groenewegen PP, Hutten JB. Workload and job satisfaction among general practitioners: a review of the literature. Soc Sci Med. 1991;32:1111–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Grol R, Mokkink H, Smits A, et al. Work satisfaction of general practitioners and the quality of patient care. Fam Pract. 1985;2:128–35.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Mawardi BH. Satisfactions, dissatisfactions, and causes of stress in medical practice. JAMA. 1979;241:1483–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Pollock K, Grime J. Patients’ perceptions of entitlement to time in general practice consultations for depression: qualitative study. BMJ. 2002;325:687.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cape J. Consultation length, patient-estimated consultation length, and satisfaction with the consultation. Br J Gen Pract. 2002;52:1004–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lang F, Floyd MR, Beine KL, Buck P. Sequenced questioning to elicit the patient’s perspective on illness: effects on information disclosure, patient satisfaction, and time expenditure. Fam Med. 2002;34:325–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kurtz SM, Silverman J, Draper J, Silverman J. Teaching and Learning Communication Skills in Medicine. 2nd ed., Oxford: Radcliffe Pub.; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lewin SA, Skea ZC, Entwistle V, Zwarenstein M, Dick J. Interventions for providers to promote a patient-centred approach in clinical consultations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;CD003267.

  21. Silverman J, Kurtz SM, Draper J, Kurtz SM. Skills for Communicating with Patients. 2nd ed. Oxford, UK: Radcliffe Pub.; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Emanuel EJ, Emanuel LL. Four models of the physician-patient relationship. JAMA. 1992;267:2221–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Ramsey P. The Patient as Person: Explorations in Medical Ethics. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Veatch RM. Modern vs. contemporary medicine: the patient-provider relation in the twenty-first century. Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 1996;6:366–70.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Kurtz S, Silverman J, Benson J, Draper J. Marrying content and process in clinical method teaching: enhancing the Calgary-Cambridge guides. Acad Med. 2003;78:802–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kurtz SM, Silverman JD. The Calgary-Cambridge Referenced Observation Guides: an aid to defining the curriculum and organizing the teaching in communication training programmes. Med Educ. 1996;30:83–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Cote L, Belanger N, Blais J. The patient-centered interview and the way it is taught. What do family physicians who have recently received their degree think? Can Fam Physician. 2002;48:1800–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lipkin M Jr., Quill TE, Napodano RJ. The medical interview: a core curriculum for residencies in internal medicine. Ann Intern Med. 1984;100:277–84.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Platt FW, Gaspar DL, Coulehan JL, et al. “Tell me about yourself”: The patient-centered interview. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:1079–85.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Fiscella K, Meldrum S, Franks P, et al. Patient trust: is it related to patient-centered behavior of primary care physicians? Med Care. 2004;42:1049–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Teutsch C. Patient-doctor communication. Med Clin North Am. 2003;87:1115–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Deckard G, Meterko M, Field D. Physician burnout: an examination of personal, professional, and organizational relationships. Med Care. 1994;32:745–54.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Kao A, Green D, Davis N, Koplan J, Cleary P. Patients’ trust in their physicians: effects of choice, continuity, and payment method. J Gen Intern Med. 1998;13:681–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Kao A, Green D, Zaslavsky A, Koplan J, Cleary P. The relationship between method ofphysician payment and patient trust. JAMA. 1998;280:323–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Safran D, Kosinski M, Tarlov A. The Primary Care Assessment Survey: test of data quality and measurement performance. Med Care. 1998;36:728–39.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Braddock CH III, Micek MA, Fryer-Edwards K, Levinson W. Factors that predict better informed consent. J Clin Ethics. 2002;13:344–52.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Stewart M, Brown JB, Donner A, et al. The impact of patient-centered care on outcomes. J Fam Pract. 2000;49:796–804.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 5th ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Marvel MK, Epstein RM, Flowers K, Beckman HB. Soliciting the patient’s agenda: have we improved? JAMA. 1999;281:283–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. American College of Physicians Ethics manual. Fourth edition. Ann Intern Med. 1998;128:576–94.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Morreim EH. From advocacy to tenacity: finding the limits. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1995;43:1170–2.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Daniels N. Just Health Care. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Buller MK, Buller DB. Physicians’ communication style and patient satisfaction. J Health Soc Behav. 1987;28:375–88.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Like R, Zyzanski SJ. Patient satisfaction with the clinical encounter: social psychological determinants. Soc Sci Med. 1987;24:351–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Robbins JA, Bertakis KD, Helms LJ, Azari R, Callahan EJ, Creten DA. The influence of physician practice behaviors on patient satisfaction. Fam Med. 1993;25:17–20.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Giron M, Manjon-Arce P, Puerto-Barber J. Clinical interview skills and identification of emotional disorders in primary care. Am J Psychol. 1998;155:530–5.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Hemenway D, Killen A, Cashman S, Parks C, Bicknell W. Physicians’ responses to financial incentives: evidence from a for-profit ambulatory care center. N Engl J Med. 1990;322:1059–63.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Radecki S, Kane R, Solomon D, Mendenhall R, Beck J. Do physicians spend less time with older patients? J Am Geriatr Soc. 1988;36:713–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Stiles W, Putnam S, Wolf M, James S. Interaction exchange structure and patient satisfaction with medical interviews. Med Care. 1979;17:667–81.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Kass-Bartelmes BL, Hughes R. Advance care planning: preferences for care at the end of life. J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother. 2004;18:87–109.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Lang F, Quill T. Making decisions with families at the end of life. Am Fam Physician. 2004;70:719–23.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Forjuoh SN, Averitt WM, Cauthen DB, Couchman GR, Symm B, Mitchell M. Open-access appointment scheduling in family practice: comparison of a demand prediction grid with actual appointments. J Am Board Fam Pract. 2001;14:259–65.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Institute for Healthcare Improvement. Idealized Design of Clinical Office Practices. Boston, MA: Institute for Healthcare Improvement; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  54. O’Hare CD, Corlett J. The outcomes of open-access scheduling. Fam Pract Manage. 2004;11:35–8.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Scott JC, Conner DA, Venohr I, et al. Effectiveness of a group outpatient visit model for chronically ill older health maintenance organization members: a 2-year randomized trial of the cooperative health care clinic. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2004;2:1463–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, Calif, USA

    Clarence H. Braddock III MD, MPH

  2. American College of Physicians, Philadelphia, Pa, USA

    Lois Snyder JD

Authors
  1. Clarence H. Braddock III MD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lois Snyder JD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Clarence H. Braddock III MD, MPH.

Additional information

The authors have no conflicts of interest to report.

This paper is based on a position paper written by Clarence H. Braddock, III, MD, MPH and Lois Snyder, JD for the Ethics and Human Rights Committee of the American College of Physicians, and approved by the American College of Physicians Board of Regents on March 31, 2003. The position paper is available on the American College of Physicians website. Members of the Committee were: William E. Golden, MD (chair), University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR; Harmon H. Davis, II, MD (vice chair), Internal Medicine Group, PC, Cheyenne, WY: David A. Fleming, MD, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO; Vincent E. Herrin, MD, National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, MD; Jay A. Jacobson, MD, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT; Stephen R. Jones, MD, Legacy Good Samaritan Hospital, Portland OR; Allen S. Keller, MD, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York; Steven Z. Pantilat, MD, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California; Daniel P. Sulmasy, OFM, MD, PhD, Saint Vincent Hospital and Medical Center, New York, New York.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Braddock, C.H., Snyder, L. The doctor will see you shortly. J GEN INTERN MED 20, 1057–1062 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.00217.x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.00217.x

Keywords

Search

Navigation