The federal health department has raised concerns about the use of AI scribes by doctors, noting the technology has little oversight and poses risks to patient privacy and data security. The health regulator is now considering whether safeguards are needed as the tools rapidly gain popularity in GP surgeries.
Surge in AI Scribe Usage Among Australian GPs
AI scribe tools, which record, transcribe, and summarise conversations between doctors and patients for medical notes, have boomed in popularity over the past 18 months. According to an online poll by the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP), use of AI scribes by doctors in Australia nearly doubled from 22% in August 2024 to 40% in November 2025. Companies offering the technology say it has been used hundreds of millions of times globally as doctors seek to ease administrative burdens.
Government Concerns Over Oversight and Privacy
In February 2026 Senate estimates briefing documents obtained by Guardian Australia under freedom of information laws, the health department noted AI scribes “have little oversight” and raised concerns about their use in healthcare settings. Digital scribes are classified as “medical devices” only if they serve a therapeutic purpose, leaving many unregulated. “Anecdotally, some are marketed as outside regulatory levers (e.g., not a medical device) or as privacy‑compliant, often with limited transparency,” the department said. “Some suppliers may be unaware their cloud platforms send data outside Australia, raising risks for patient data security.”
Implications for Patient Safety and Medicare Costs
The department also noted that some suppliers advertise a 30% revenue increase for health professionals with no additional hours or patient consultations, “which has implications for [Medicare Benefits Scheme] costs.” In an April briefing document from the department’s AI advisory group, it was highlighted that AI scribes could improve clinicians’ productivity and reduce burnout, but are subject to the same limitations as other large language models in terms of quality and accuracy. “This has implications for patient safety, clinical accountability, and the integrity of data held within national digital health infrastructure.”
Consent and Consumer Concerns
The department observed significant variation in how clinicians obtain patient consent for AI scribe use. “Our position is that informed consent requires consumers to understand the benefits and limitations of the technology to which they are consenting.” Dr Elizabeth Deveny, chief executive of the Consumer Health Forum, said the documents show consumers and government are asking the same questions. “It is good that the department has identified these as key issues. The next question is really whether the current safeguards are strong enough and consistent enough in day-to-day practice,” she said. “If [scribes] save clinicians time … the public deserves to know if that time means better care, better access, or if it just means more billable activity, which doesn’t help us with the burnout issue.”
Patchwork Regulation and Upcoming Review
In Australia, oversight of AI scribes involves multiple regulators, including the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (Ahpra), and the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner. The TGA has been reviewing digital scribes to determine whether they should be classed as medical devices, with a report due in coming months. “The TGA is working with industry associations and individual companies to ensure regulatory requirements are understood, and we plan to publish a summary of the outcomes from the review in coming months,” a health department spokesperson said. Privacy commissioner Carly Kind noted in a May speech that her office had been “tracking closely” the rollout of AI scribe technology and engaging with civil society organisations concerned about deficiencies in consent protocols and the absence of disclosure in privacy policies.
