The quiet revolution in GP surgeries, where artificial intelligence (AI) scribes are increasingly used to record conversations with patients, has raised serious concerns about patient data privacy and regulatory oversight. According to a recent online poll by the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP), use of AI scribes among doctors in Australia nearly doubled between August 2024 and November 2025, from 22% to 40%. This rapid adoption has sparked warnings from the Australian federal health department that patient data is being handled with "little oversight", leaving questions about how this technology will be implemented in the NHS.
AI scribe tools are designed to automatically record, transcribe, and summarise conversations between doctors and patients, generating medical notes. Companies supplying these technologies report hundreds of millions of uses worldwide, as practitioners seek to alleviate administrative burdens associated with patient consultations. However, the classification of AI scribes as "medical devices" under the Therapeutic Goods Act has created ambiguity – some suppliers may market their products as falling outside existing regulatory frameworks or as privacy-compliant, often with limited transparency.
Concerns raised by the Australian federal health department include the potential for patient data to be stored on cloud platforms outside Australia, increasing security risks. Questions also surround the accuracy and quality of notes generated by large language models, which could have implications for patient safety and clinical accountability. The department noted considerable variation in how clinicians obtain informed consent from patients, stressing that consumers must fully understand both the benefits and limitations of the technology they are consenting to.
Dr Elizabeth Deveny, Chief Executive of the Consumer Health Forum, has echoed concerns about the lack of transparency surrounding AI scribes. She emphasised the importance of ensuring that any time saved by clinicians through AI scribes translates into better patient care or access, rather than simply increasing billable activity without addressing issues like clinician burnout. Reports have also emerged of patients being told they would need to find an alternative provider if they did not consent to the use of AI scribes, raising ethical questions about patient choice and access to care.
In Australia, oversight of AI scribes is managed by a coalition of regulators, including the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (Ahpra), and the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). However, it remains unclear how these regulatory frameworks will be adapted to address the increasing use of AI scribes in UK GP surgeries.
The NHS has not commented on its plans for implementing AI scribes in GP surgeries. When approached by UKPulse, a spokesperson noted that any new technology would need to meet strict data protection and safety standards, but declined to provide further details.