There is a sentence almost nobody says out loud inside hospitals:

Not every physician can, or should, end their career running an emergency department.

And yet many healthcare systems still behave as if the physician were a replaceable part: while they perform, they are demanded from; when they become exhausted, ill, or older, they are treated as an administrative problem.

That is a silent form of exclusion. It harms both the professional and the system.

Emergency services include physicians who have spent years, sometimes decades, exposed to long shifts, fragmented sleep, verbal violence, care overload, legal pressure, critical decisions, and emotional wear.

In a certain sense, they are healthcare war veterans.

Not because medicine is a war.

Because emergency care leaves marks. Some visible. Others not.

The problem: confusing performance with value

A physician's performance in an emergency shift may be affected by many factors: hypertension, heart disease, sleep disorders, anxiety, depression, burnout, musculoskeletal disease, visual decline, chronic fatigue, or simply years of exposure to the wear of the service. Family responsibilities, life changes, and accumulated exhaustion after decades of work may also play a role.

That does not mean the professional has lost value. It may mean they are no longer in the right place within the system.

The institutional mistake appears when the only answer is binary: emergency shift or exit, door or discard, production or irrelevance.

That logic is poor, inhumane, and inefficient.

A physician with experience may no longer be able to face twelve continuous hours of emergency care, but may contribute enormously in outpatient clinics, telemedicine, chronic disease follow-up, clinical audit, health education, quality management, patient safety, diagnostic orientation, or care coordination.

A system that cannot relocate that human capital loses clinical knowledge that took decades to build.

When people become indicators

There is a reality that rarely appears in healthcare management reports: professionals who continue to work with injuries, chronic conditions, or permanent consequences acquired over years of practice.

Some carry spinal injuries after decades of moving patients and working through full nights on call. Others live with heart disease, hypertension, sleep disorders, visual deterioration, musculoskeletal illness, traumatic sequelae, or acquired disabilities. Many continue working because the core of medicine remains intact: clinical judgment, experience, and decision-making capacity.

Organizations, however, often look first at something else.

While the professional generates visits, covers shifts, completes forms, and sustains care indicators, they are considered a valuable resource. But when illness, injury, or accumulated wear reduces that production capacity, they risk becoming an administrative problem.

The accumulated experience disappears behind the metrics. The professional story is reduced to numbers. Knowledge built over decades stops being part of the institutional conversation.

And yet the real value of a physician was never only the number of patients seen per hour.

A professional with twenty or thirty years of clinical experience has something that cannot be bought, improvised, or easily replaced: judgment. They recognize patterns that are not in protocols. They detect weak signals before obvious diagnoses appear. They understand family, institutional, and human dynamics that no algorithm fully records.

When an institution loses that view, it is not only losing labor capacity. It is losing clinical memory.

The central question should not be how much a person can still produce. It should be: how can they continue to bring value to the system without putting their health or patient safety at risk?

What more mature systems do

Several countries have moved toward models in which illness, disability, or professional wear do not automatically mean labor exclusion.

In the United States, the ADA framework requires employers to consider reasonable accommodations for workers with disabilities unless they create undue hardship. The EEOC clarifies that workers do not need to use special legal formulas to request work modifications connected to a medical condition. The American Medical Association, through its STEPS Forward program, shifts attention away from the physician who cannot endure and toward organizational factors: institutional culture, administrative burden, workflows, and leadership responsibility in preventing burnout.

In the United Kingdom, the 2024 General Medical Council report showed that one third of doctors were in a struggling situation: regularly working beyond scheduled hours and feeling unable to manage their workload adequately. A significant proportion also reduced hours or refused additional work as a professional survival strategy.

The message is clear: when the system overloads its doctors, doctors begin to withdraw partially from the system. Not from lack of commitment. From exhaustion.

In the European Union, the principle of reasonable accommodation continues to develop from the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. In Uruguay, Law No. 18.651 establishes obligations related to workplace adaptation and labor inclusion for people with disabilities.

The problem does not seem to be the absence of rules. The problem is that adaptation is usually considered only after the situation has already become critical.

The emergency department cannot be the physician's only destination

Emergency care demands reflexes, stress tolerance, speed, physical endurance, and the ability to manage uncertainty. It is not a neutral environment. It is an area of high cognitive and emotional demand.

When a system forces everyone to perform equally regardless of age, health, or accumulated burden, it is not defending quality. It is manufacturing risk.

The exhausted physician does not only suffer. They also become more vulnerable to error, irritability, emotional disconnection, defensive medicine, and progressive deterioration of clinical judgment.

This should not be read as an individual accusation. It is an organizational design problem.

An intelligent system should distinguish between negligence and fatigue, lack of commitment and overexposure, permanent incapacity and the need for professional transition.

Uruguay has already started naming the problem

This debate is not foreign to Uruguay.

The Medical College of Uruguay has developed campaigns and programs on professional wellbeing, recognizing that physicians' physical and mental health directly affects care quality and patient safety.

National research has also documented the phenomenon. Studies have linked physician burnout with long hours, emotional demands, job insecurity, multiple employment, and care overload. According to data shared by the University of the Republic in 2025, approximately one in three Uruguayan physicians meets criteria compatible with burnout syndrome.

The scale of the problem can no longer be considered anecdotal or attributed only to individual traits. It is an organizational and systemic phenomenon.

The other exhaustion: working too much and saving too little

There is another less discussed aspect: economic wear.

For decades, the idea circulated that physicians necessarily achieved economic stability. Reality is more complex. Many professionals increase income not because they work less, but because they work more: more shifts, more nights, more weekends, more institutions, more travel, more hours away from their families.

Income often represents accumulated exposure, not necessarily prosperity.

The young physician runs to consolidate financially. The mature physician keeps running to sustain income, family responsibilities, and commitments already made. When health begins to collect its bill, the system still demands the same speed. But not everyone can sustain it. Those without enough financial margin have less ability to reduce hours, transition professionally, or prioritize health.

Talking about professional transition is not talking about privilege. It is talking about professional sustainability.

Artificial intelligence can help, but not as a whip

Artificial intelligence should not be used to watch physicians as if they were platform delivery workers. That would probably be the worst possible use of the technology.

Used ethically, however, it can become a powerful tool to protect healthcare teams. An intelligent hospital could identify aggregated occupational risk patterns: overload of night work, extreme schedule fragmentation, growing absenteeism, excessive turnover, increased medical leave, and early signs of exhaustion.

Not to punish. Not to build files against people. To intervene before the damage becomes irreversible.

The scientific literature already explores these possibilities through the analysis of clinical activity records and electronic health records. But the central issue is not technological. It is ethical.

The difference between surveillance and care depends on purpose. AI designed to punish is surveillance. AI designed to protect is intelligent management.

What an intelligent hospital should do

A modern hospital should not wait for the physician to break. It should anticipate: identify risk trajectories, offer non-punitive occupational evaluations, facilitate gradual transitions, create real professional reconversion programs, reduce exposure when necessary, and make better use of accumulated experience.

The question should not be: can this physician still endure emergency work?

The right question is: where can this person bring the most value today without risking their health or patient safety?

A physician with twenty-five years of experience may no longer be able to receive eighty patients at an emergency door on a winter Monday. But they may be extraordinarily valuable in clinical teaching, audit, care coordination, quality, patient safety, chronic disease follow-up, or telemedicine.

That is not accommodating people as a favor. It is managing clinical talent.

Uruguay and the interior: a different reality

In small countries, and particularly outside the capital, losing an experienced physician is not a simple administrative event. It means losing institutional memory, local knowledge, relationships built over years, and problem-solving capacity.

Many professionals perform invisible functions that never appear in indicators. They know the patients, the families, the real circuits, and the problems that have not yet reached the spreadsheet.

That is why professional transition should be an institutional policy, not a last-minute improvisation.

Medicine must also care for those who care

For years we have repeated that the system must be patient-centered. That is true. But it is incomplete.

A patient-centered system that destroys its workers ultimately fails patients too. Patient safety begins with healthy, rested, respected teams placed in the right roles.

The exhausted, ill, or institutionally humiliated physician is not only a labor victim. They may also become a vulnerable point in the care process.

Professional wellbeing is not a luxury. It is a requirement for quality.

Conclusion

Veteran emergency physicians are not disposable.

Some can no longer run the same race or tolerate the same night. Some live with injuries, chronic illnesses, or acquired consequences after years sustaining essential services. Some continue working more hours than reasonable because they have not yet found a viable alternative.

But many preserve what contributes most to medicine: judgment, experience, clinical intuition, and the ability to teach.

The challenge is not deciding when they stop being useful. The challenge is deciding how to keep using what they can still contribute.

Artificial intelligence, management systems, and intelligent hospitals should serve precisely that purpose: not to replace the humanity of medicine, not to turn people into indicators, not to measure only productivity, but to prevent the system from silently pushing aside those who sustained the front line for years.

Because a truly intelligent institution is not the one that buys more technology. It is the one that learns to care better for its patients without destroying those who care for them.

Aula Nexus contact

At Aula Nexus Humanum we address artificial intelligence applied to real healthcare through concrete problems: clinical management, team care, data, institutional decisions, and the sustainability of healthcare work.

If you are interested in participating, receiving information about upcoming classes, or discussing a specific institutional need, write to us.

[email protected]

Nexus Humanum
The human interface between AI and real clinical practice.

Sine fumo et nugis.