Register      Login
Journal of Primary Health Care Journal of Primary Health Care Society
Journal of The Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners
Shopping Cart: ( empty )
You are here: Home > Journals > HC > HC25079
RESEARCH ARTICLE (Open Access)
Online Early

Using AI scribes in New Zealand primary care consultations: an exploratory survey

Angela Ballantyne https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2666-9557 1 2 * , Rochelle Style https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2001-9756 3 , Maria Stubbe https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6661-908X 1 , Samantha Murton https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0150-5567 1 , Tony Dowell https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0131-117X 1
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

1 Department of Primary Health Care and General Practice, University of Otago, Wellington, Aotearoa New Zealand.

2 Bioethics Centre, University of Otago, Dunedin, Aotearoa New Zealand.

3 Bioethics and Health Law Consultant and Independent Researcher, New Zealand.

* Correspondence to: angela.ballantyne@otago.ac.nz

Handling Editor: Tim Stokes

Journal of Primary Health Care https://doi.org/10.1071/HC25079
Submitted: 9 May 2025  Accepted: 30 June 2025  Published: 8 August 2025

© 2025 The Author(s) (or their employer(s)). Published by CSIRO Publishing on behalf of The Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)

Abstract

Introduction

AI scribes have had a rapid uptake in primary care across New Zealand (NZ). The benefits of this new technology must be weighed against the potential risks they may pose.

Aim

This study provides a snapshot of AI scribes use in primary care to generate clinical notes. We aimed to understand emerging provider experiences, identify perceived clinical benefits and concerns, and flag potential ethical and legal issues as a basis for future research and policy development.

Methods

GPs and health providers working in primary care across NZ were invited to participate in an anonymous survey about their experience with AI scribes (February–March 2024).

Results

One hundred and ninety-seven respondents completed the survey, 88% (n = 164) of whom were GPs. Of these, 40% (n = 70) had experience with AI scribes. Reported benefits included: reduced multitasking (n = 46), saved time (n = 43), and improved rapport with patients (n = 43). Key concerns included: compliance with NZ legal and ethical frameworks (n = 108), data security (n = 98), errors or omissions (n = 93), and data leaving New Zealand (n = 91). Only 66% (n = 41) had read the terms and conditionss of the AI scribe tool, and 59% (n = 35) reported seeking patient consent. Most (80%, n = 50) found AI scribes helpful or very helpful, and 56% (n = 35) said the tool changed consultation dynamics.

Discussion

While there is strong uptake and enthusiasm for AI scribes in primary care in NZ, critical issues remain around legal and ethical oversight, patient consent, data security, and the broader impact on clinician–patient interactions. Health providers need clearer guidance and regulatory support for safe, ethical, and legal use of AI tools.

Keywords: accountability, advantages, artificial intelligence, bioethics, clinical notes, concerns, consent, data ethics, health law, primary care, scribes, survey, transcribe.

References

1  RNZCGP. 2022 workforce survey; 2022. Available at https://www.rnzcgp.org.nz/resources/workforce-survey/2022-workforce-survey/ [accessed 25 March 2025].

2  Edwards PJ. GPs spend 14% of their session time documenting consultation notes and updating electronic health records. Br J Gen Pract 2024; 74(742): 202.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

3  Dowell A, Stubbe M, Scott-Dowell K, et al. Talking with the alien: interaction with computers in the GP consultation. Aust J Prim Health 2013; 19(4): 275-82.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

4  AI in Primary Care Group. Round two AI in primary care survey highlights growing adoption. GPNZ; 2025. Available at https://gpnz.org.nz/our-work/ai-in-primary-care-group/https://gpnz.org.nz/media-releases/joint-media-release-round-two-ai-in-primary-care-survey-highlights-growing-adoption/

5  Terry AL, Kueper JK, Beleno R, et al. Is primary health care ready for artificial intelligence? What do primary health care stakeholders say? BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2022; 22(1): 237.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

6  Falcetta FS, De Almeida FK, Lemos J, et al. Automatic documentation of professional health interactions: a systematic review. Artif Intell Med 2023; 137: 102487.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

7  Tran BD, Mangu R, Tai-Seale M, et al. Automatic speech recognition performance for digital scribes: a performance comparison between general-purpose and specialized models tuned for patient-clinician conversations. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2023; 2022: 1072-80.
| Google Scholar | PubMed |

8  Okwor IA, Hitch G, Hakkim S, et al. Digital technologies impact on healthcare delivery: a systematic review of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine-learning (ML) adoption, challenges, and opportunities. AI 2024; 5(4): 1918-41.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

9  Tierney AA, Gayre G, Hoberman B, et al. Ambient artificial intelligence scribes to alleviate the burden of clinical documentation. NEJM Catal Innov Care Deliv 2024; 5(3): CAT-23.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

10  Shuaib A. Transforming healthcare with AI: promises, pitfalls, and pathways forward. Int J Gen Med 2024; 17: 1765-71.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

11  Nawab K. Artificial intelligence scribe: a new era in medical documentation. Artif Intell Health 2024; 1(4): 12-5.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

12  InPhySec. Waikato District Health Board (WDHB) Incident Response Analysis. Final Report, 2 September 2022; 2022. Available at https://www.tewhatuora.govt.nz/assets/Publications/Proactive-releases/WDHB-Final-Report-2.0-redacted.pdf

13  MBIE. Cabinet paper: Approach to work on Artificial Intelligence. 25 July 2024. Available at https://www.mbie.govt.nz/dmsdocument/28913-approach-to-work-on-artificial-intelligence-proactiverelease-pdf

14  Whittaker R, Dobson R, Jin CK, et al. An example of governance for AI in health services from Aotearoa New Zealand. NPJ Digit Med 2023; 6: 164.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

15  National Health Service. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning guidelines NHS – England. 13 March 2024 (last updated 7 April 2025); 2025. Available at https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/artificial-intelligence-ai-and-machine-learning/

16  World Health Organization. Ethics and governance of artificial intelligence for health: WHO guidance. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.

17  World Health Organization. Ethics and governance of artificial intelligence for health. Guidance on large multi-modal models. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2024. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.

18  RACGP. Artificial Intelligence (AI) scribes. Available at https://www.racgp.org.au/running-a-practice/technology/business-technology/artificial-intelligence-ai-scribes [accessed 27 March 2025].

19  WellSouth Primary Health Network. Primary Care AI Resource Hub. Available at https://wellsouth.nz/provider-access/clinical-resources/ai-in-primary-care [accessed 27 March 2025].

20  National Artificial Intelligence and Algorithm Expert Advisory Group (NAIAEAG). Generative AI and Large Language Models: Guidance on the use of AI within Health New Zealand. Health New Zealand | Te Whatu Ora; 2025.

21  Cohen GR, Friedman CP, Ryan AM, et al. Variation in physicians’ electronic health record documentation and potential patient harm from that variation. J Gen Intern Med 2019; 34: 2355-67.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

22  Medical Council of NZ. Regulation in the Era of Artificial Intelligence (AI); 2024. Available at https://hail.to/the-medical-council-of-new-zealand/publication/yPK9Okn/article/XwbONx7 [accessed 26 March 2025].

23  Medical Council of NZ. Managing patient records; 2020. Available at www.mcnz.org.nz/assets/standards/0c24a75f7b/Maintenance-patient-records.pdf [accessed 26 March 2025].

24  Prictor M. Tape recording consultations would be of considerable assistance: How do the courts treat recordings of healthcare consultations? AABHL Conference; 2024.

25  Tunzi M, Satin DJ, Day PG. The Consent Continuum: a new model of consent, assent, and nondissent for Primary Care. Hastings Cent Rep 2021; 2021 51(2): 33-40.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

26  Health and Disability Commissioner - Opinion 08HDC20258. Informed consent to innovative surgery; 2009. Available at https://www.hdc.org.nz/decisions/search-decisions/2009/08hdc20258/

27  Forbes S. Medical Council working on new guidelines for use of AI. NZ Doctor; 2025. Available at https://www.nzdoctor.co.nz/article/news/medical-council-working-new-guidelines-use-ai

28  Palaniappan K, Lin EYT, Vogel S. Global Regulatory Frameworks for the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the Healthcare Services Sector. Healthcare 2024; 12(5): 562.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

29  Ebad SA, Alhashmi A, Amara M, et al. Artificial Intelligence-Based Software as a Medical Device (AI-SaMD): A Systematic Review. Healthcare 2025; 13(7): 817.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

30  Klitzman R. Pleasing doctors: when it gets in the way. BMJ 2007; 335(7618): 514.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

31  Dixon-Woods M, Williams SJ, Jackson CJ, et al. Why do women consent to surgery, even when they do not want to? An interactionist and Bourdieusian analysis. Soc Sci Med 2006; 62(11): 2742-53.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

32  Heritage J, Elliott MN, Stivers T, et al. Reducing inappropriate antibiotics prescribing: the role of online commentary on physical examination findings. Patient Educ Couns 2010; 81(1): 119-25.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |