From Individualized Interactions to Standardized Schedules: A History of Time Organization in U.S. Outpatient Medicine.

Many outpatient physicians and patients feel that current scheduling systems do not afford enough time for direct patient-physician interaction, leaving patients feeling unheard and physicians feeling demoralized. This dissatisfaction degrades patients' trust in the health care system and contributes to workforce moral injury and burnout. In the hopes of understanding the roots of this time stress and helping to guide future decisions about how to organize physicians' time, this article describes changes in the organization of U.S. outpatient physicians' time, starting from care at home in the late 19th century. It discusses the origins of the appointment system, which was invented to be highly personalized, with assistants adjusting appointment durations to accommodate clinical activities, specific patient needs, and individual physician proclivities. The article then describes how centralization of appointment scheduling became more common as U.S. medicine became increasingly consolidated into larger and larger groups and health systems. This distanced schedulers from the people and care they were organizing and necessitated standardized appointment durations, which did not accommodate individual patient and physician needs. With the rise of managerialism, schedulers became increasingly accountable to administrators rather than patients and physicians. Whereas early appointment systems depended on personal connection between schedulers and the physicians and patients they supported, today's schedulers have few such interactions. The widespread shift to centralized scheduling and standardized time slots has contributed to misalignment among time allocation, patient care, and health care workforce well-being and is likely exacerbating ongoing tensions among patients, physicians, and administrators.

Introduction: Healthcare Practitioners' Emotions and the Politics of Well-Being in Twentieth Century Anglo-America.

From the stress of burnout to the gratification of camaraderie, medicine is suffused with emotions that educators, administrators, and reformers have sought to shape. Yet historians of medicine have only begun to analyze how emotions have structured health care work. This introductory essay frames a special issue on health care practitioners' emotions in the twentieth-century United Kingdom and United States. We argue that the massive bureaucratic and scientific changes in medicine after the Second World War helped to reshape affective aspects of care. The articles in this issue emphasize the intersubjectivity of feelings in healthcare settings and the mutually constitutive relationship between patients' and providers' emotions. Bridging the history of medicine with the history of emotion demonstrates how emotions are instilled rather than innate, social as well as personal, and, above all else, change over time. The articles reckon with the power dynamics of healthcare. They address the policies and practices that institutions, organizations, and governments have implemented to shape, govern, or manage the affective experiences and well-being of healthcare workers. And they point to important new directions in the history of medicine.