Healthcare systems across Europe are under increasing pressure. Clinicians are working longer hours, administrative demands continue to grow, and patients often report that medical encounters feel rushed and impersonal.

These pressures are reshaping one of medicine’s most fundamental elements: the relationship between clinician and patient.

Researchers say the shift reflects decades of structural changes in healthcare systems that have gradually reduced the time and attention clinicians can devote to patients.

Now, as AI tools begin entering clinical workflows — from documentation support to patient triage — a new question is emerging: Will these technologies deepen the sense of distance between clinicians and patients, or can they help restore time for more human-centered care?

Experts say the answer depends less on the technology and more on how healthcare systems choose to use it.

A Problem That Predates AI

Carlo Botrugno, PhD, assistant professor in the Department of Legal Sciences at the University of Florence, Florence, Italy, told Medscape News Europe that the focus of care shifted with structural changes that began in the late 20th century. As managerial models emphasizing efficiency, productivity, and measurable outcomes took hold, clinicians spent more time on documentation and administrative work.

This shift, he said, gradually drew attention away from the patient as a person. In earlier eras, physicians focused not only on the biological aspects of disease but also on its emotional and social repercussions. Today, technology and bureaucratic processes more often mediate interactions between clinicians and patients, making that level of engagement more difficult to sustain.

Evidence suggests that time pressure plays a major role. Data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) show that patients report better experiences when consultations allow enough time for meaningful interaction with clinicians. Yet only about 38% of primary care visits in OECD countries last 15 minutes or longer.

In hospitals, nurses frequently report that one of the most commonly missed aspects of care is simply talking with and comforting patients.

Workload pressures further complicate the picture. According to the World Health Organization, about one quarter of physicians work more than 50 h/wk, and roughly one third of doctors and nurses experience depression.

Under such conditions, emotional distancing from patients can sometimes emerge as a coping mechanism. A study conducted in Greece found that health professionals were more likely than the general population to attribute fewer human characteristics to hospitalized patients — a form of “mechanistic dehumanization” that some researchers suggest may function as a coping strategy to reduce emotional strain.

Rossella Falvo, PhD, an associate professor at the University of Padua, Padua, Italy, who studies the psychology of dehumanization, said intense clinical demands can make it more difficult for clinicians to engage in the social cognition needed to recognize patients’ emotional states.

When clinicians are focused on solving complex medical problems under pressure, she told Medscape News Europe, it becomes more difficult to perceive the patient as a full psychological individual.

Falvo said that in certain situations, some emotional distancing may even facilitate clinical work — for example, during surgery or emergencies where inflicting unavoidable pain is part of treatment. Problems arise, however, when that distancing becomes routine and extends beyond those contexts, potentially weakening the therapeutic relationship.

Can AI Help Rebuild the Doctor-Patient Relationship?

Against this backdrop of mounting workload pressures and shrinking time with patients, some experts believe AI could play an unexpected role: helping clinicians reclaim time for more direct patient care.

Adewunmi Akingbola, MD, MPhil, an infectious diseases epidemiologist and founder of HealthDrive Nigeria, told Medscape News Europe that AI systems could reduce clinicians’ clerical workload by automating tasks such as scheduling, documentation, and basic patient data triage.

Reducing these administrative burdens could allow clinicians to devote more time to direct patient interaction.

Some research suggests the impact could be significant, with AI tools reducing certain clinical workloads by 19%-50% in some settings.

However, experts caution that technology alone cannot resolve deeper structural problems within healthcare systems.

Hazem Zohny, PhD, senior research fellow in practical ethics at the University of Oxford, Oxford, England, noted that many patients already feel their care is rushed or impersonal. If AI tools are implemented primarily as cost-cutting measures, they could further reduce opportunities for human interaction.

Used thoughtfully, however, AI could take over routine administrative or explanatory tasks, allowing clinicians to focus on aspects of medicine that require empathy, communication, and judgment.

Botrugno argues that preserving these human dimensions must remain central as healthcare systems adopt new technologies. Empathy, intimacy, and physical presence remain core elements of medical care that machines cannot replicate.

Ethical and Access Challenges

Patient organizations broadly recognize the potential benefits of AI in healthcare. A survey conducted by the European Patients’ Forum, involving 146 patient organizations, found strong support for AI’s potential to improve diagnosis, support healthcare professionals, and enable more personalized care.

However, respondents also stressed the need to carefully address ethical risks, including bias, transparency, and the protection of patient data.

Accountability is another concern. Because AI tools are intended to support — rather than replace — human decision-making, maintaining clear human oversight will remain essential.

Equitable access is also a challenge.

Penilla Gunther, former member of the Swedish parliament and member of the EU Cancer Mission Board, said minority and vulnerable groups may face particular challenges as AI becomes more integrated into healthcare.

Some patients may not yet be using AI tools and may first need access to these technologies and guidance on how to use them. But the issue goes beyond technology, she told Medscape News Europe. Many people still need support in understanding how healthcare systems work and how to navigate services effectively. Health and digital literacy remain significant challenges across Europe, making education, training, and clear information essential.

Healthcare professionals themselves may also need additional preparation. Dora Capozza, professor of social psychology at the University of Padua, said many nurses in hospitals in the Veneto region of Italy remain unfamiliar with AI tools and their potential clinical applications.

Training programs could help clinicians better understand both the capabilities and limitations of these technologies.

Zohny also emphasizes the importance of hands-on experience with AI systems before relying on them in high-stakes clinical decisions.

Keeping Humanity at the Center of Care

For policymakers and healthcare leaders, the challenge will be ensuring that new technologies support — rather than undermine — the human side of medical care.

Zohny said AI may be most useful when deployed to address system pressures such as staff shortages, documentation burdens, or communication gaps. At the same time, safeguards should ensure that patients can still easily access a clinician and move from automated systems to direct care when needed.

For Botrugno, that balance will be critical as healthcare systems evolve. While technology can support clinical work, he said, the core of medicine still lies in the relationship between clinician and patient.

Botrugno, Falvo, Akingbola, Zohny, Gunther, and Capozza reported having no relevant financial relationships. 

Luca Arfini is an Italian science journalist and communications specialist based in Amsterdam, with expertise in health, sustainability, and EU policies.