Clinicians increasingly turn to AI as timely relief for burdensome tasks
Doctors demonstrate willingness to use technology that provides benefits to them and improves patient care – but concerns remain.
Back in 2004, when President George W. Bush first laid out the challenge of seeking widespread adoption of electronic health records, I distinctly remember the key argument of naysayers.
Physicians, they said, would fight EHRs tooth and nail. We’d have to wait for the current generation of doctors to retire before we’d get a class of physicians that would want to use computers. Clinicians hated technology.
To me, all these arguments seemed a bit off target. Physicians had adapted to and accepted all kinds of technology throughout their careers, from imaging modalities to various electronic devices. Heck, they learned to use cell phones!
It wasn’t the computer technology that was a put-off. It was the fact that using the computer didn’t provide a measurable benefit to either them or their patients. It chained them to a keyboard, transformed them into data inputters and made clinical decision-making harder because it supplanted critical thinking with data collection.
Clinician burnout, unsurprisingly, started to rise, and clinicians pointed to the records systems that primarily fed billing systems, and only secondarily provided marginal benefit to patient care.
Now, with artificial intelligence providing much-needed support, clinicians have become enthusiastic and quick advocates for the emerging technology. They’re voting with their adoption track records.
AI is on a fast track
A couple recently released surveys provide a glimpse at how physicians are turning to advanced technologies for the burden relief they can provide and their potential to improve patient care.
This week, the American Medical Association’s Center for Digital Health and AI released data showing that clinicians’ use of augmented intelligence has doubled because confidence in the technology is growing.
Results of the organization’s 2026 survey found that 81 percent of physicians are using augmented intelligence in their practices, more than twice the 38 percent of physicians who said in its 2023 survey that they used such technologies. (The AMA uses the term augmented intelligence (AI) “as a conceptualization of artificial intelligence that focuses on AI’s assistive role, emphasizing that its design enhances human intelligence rather than replaces it.”)
The organization, which represents the bulk of the nation’s physicians, concludes that survey results suggest that physicians are cautiously optimistic that AI has promise to combat burnout, but still harbor concerns about isolated use of the technology by patients to interpret results without input and explanation by physicians.
“AI has quickly become part of everyday medical practice,” said AMA CEO John Whyte, MD. “Physicians see real promise in its ability to support clinical decisions and cut down on administrative burden. But as this technology advances, it is critical that augmented intelligence be designed to enhance – not replace – physicians.”
Among key results reported by the AMA:
Adoption. Clinical use of AI continues to grow in both prevalence and scope. More than 80 percent of physicians now use AI professionally, doubling since 2023. The average number of use cases per physician is 2.3 in 2026, up from 1.1 in 2023.
Use cases. The most common physician uses of AI include medical research summarization and clinical care documentation. Some 70 percent of physicians see AI as a tool to automate tasks that contribute to work-related burnout.
Physician confidence. More than three-quarters of physicians believe AI improves their ability to care for patients, compared with 65 percent in 2023. The greatest hopes lie in diagnostic accuracy and work efficiency.
Clinician hopes. Some 40 percent of physicians are equally excited and concerned about AI, citing patient privacy and the integrity of the patient-physician relationship as top concerns.
Shared ownership. This remains a priority for most physicians (85 percent) who want to be consulted or directly involved in decisions about AI adoption.
Adoption spikes in clinics
Meanwhile, another report detailing AI adoption among providers finds quick uptake over the past couple years.
OmniMD, a Hawthorne, N.Y.-based provider of records systems, billing and AI solutions, noted in a recent report that all the nation’s 43 largest health systems have adopted AI note-writing tools, according to primary sources. Additionally, another source for the report showed that 71 percent of U.S. hospitals “had AI built into their patient records system in 2024, up from 66 percent the year before.”
Clinician exhaustion, and the need to provide relief, has been the impetus for the quick adoption, the report concludes. And AI, as a solution, “showed up at exactly the right moment.”
While facilitating the creation of clinical notes is one of the hottest uses within clinics today, AI technology actually represents several potential tools that do different jobs. For example, it can support the reading of imaging scans and X-rays, can help identify patients who are at risk to worsen, and can support billing and scheduling.
Still, a lot needs to be done to take full advantage of AI, primarily ensuring that the technology actually delivers on its promise. It cites reports that “1,356 AI medical tools approved by the FDA by September 2025. But here is the catch: 97 percent of them were approved without any real patient outcome testing.”
That lack of proof is exacerbated by shadow AI, “when hospital staff start using AI tools on their own, without telling the hospital and without any official approval,” the OmniMD report notes. “A doctor might copy patient notes into ChatGPT to get a quick summary. A nurse might use a personal AI app on their phone to help draft a patient response. It sounds harmless on the surface, but it creates real problems. These tools have not been checked for compliance with HIPAA privacy rules. They have not been reviewed for clinical accuracy.”
Clinics also cite concerns in hesitating to use AI, with 77 percent of major health systems saying they fear the tools are not good enough yet, according to a JAMIA survey. Another 47 percent cited cost concerns; 40 percent noted regulatory confusion; and 17 percent said doctors and nurses were reluctant.
But increasingly, OmniMD predicts that AI will be built into software that clinicians already use; that concerns will grow that rural care organizations are unable to implement the technology; the FDA will start requiring real clinical proof about AI’s efficacy; and that legal issues will arise.
Fred Bazzoli is the Editor in Chief of Health Data Management.