The federal health department has identified privacy and oversight risks associated with doctors' surging use of AI scribe tools, with regulators now assessing whether stronger safeguards are needed. The technology records, transcribes and summarises patient consultations, and uptake among Australian GPs nearly doubled from 22% in August 2024 to 40% in November 2025, according to a Royal Australian College of General Practitioners poll.
Briefing documents from February 2026, obtained by Guardian Australia under freedom of information laws, show the department warned AI scribes "have little oversight" and raised concerns about data security and marketing claims. The concerns extend to how companies position their products outside existing regulatory levers.
Rapid adoption raises regulatory flags
The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) classifies digital scribes as medical devices only if they serve a therapeutic purpose. The department noted that some suppliers market their tools as falling outside this definition or as privacy-compliant, "often with limited transparency." It also flagged that some suppliers may be unaware their cloud platforms send patient data outside Australia.
Separately, the department observed that certain providers advertise a 30% revenue increase for health professionals without requiring extra hours or consultations, "which has implications for Medicare Benefits Scheme costs." An April briefing from the department's AI advisory group acknowledged scribes could improve clinician productivity but said they carry the same quality and accuracy limitations as other large language models. The document states: "This has implications for patient safety, clinical accountability, and the integrity of data held within national digital health infrastructure."
For professionals working on AI for Government policy and procurement, these findings highlight the tension between rapid deployment of AI tools and the lag in regulatory frameworks. The department's AI advisory group is tracking the technology's impact on care delivery and public health data systems.
Patchwork oversight complicates safeguards
Oversight of AI scribes in Australia is split across the TGA, the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (Ahpra) and the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner. The TGA is conducting a review of digital scribes to determine whether they should be regulated as medical devices. A health department spokesperson said the review's outcomes will be published in coming months, adding that the TGA is working with industry to ensure companies understand regulatory requirements.
Privacy commissioner Carly Kind said in a May speech that her office had been "tracking closely" the rollout, meeting with the RACGP ethics committee and technology providers. She added: "We continue to engage with civil society organisations concerned about the rollout of scribes, the deficiencies in GPs' implementation of AI scribe consent protocols, and the absence of disclosure around scribes in privacy policies."
The situation underscores the need for clear compliance pathways when deploying AI tools in clinical environments - a topic covered extensively in AI for Healthcare training materials that address governance, data security and ethical implementation.
Consent and patient rights at stake
The department found wide variation in how consent is obtained from patients. "Our position is that informed consent requires consumers to understand the benefits and limitations of the technology to which they are consenting," the briefing states. Dr Elizabeth Deveny, chief executive of the Consumer Health Forum, said patients are increasingly being told they must consent or find another provider.
"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," Deveny said. She added that if tools 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."
Why this matters for government professionals
The department's warnings signal that AI scribe deployment is moving faster than the regulatory systems designed to manage it. Government professionals working in health, privacy and technology policy need to prepare for reforms that may reclassify these tools as medical devices, mandate stricter data residency rules, and enforce standardised consent protocols. The TGA review due in coming months will likely set precedents for how AI tools in clinical settings are governed, with direct implications for procurement, compliance and inter-agency coordination.
Your membership also unlocks:
