AI tools are not a futuristic concept in general practice - they are already part of day-to-day workflows.
From AI scribes that take notes during consultations to clinical workflow automations, these technologies can ease administrative burden, improve consult efficiency, and give GPs more time to focus on patient care and the clinical experience.
AI tools introduce new capabilities but also new risks, which are most evident in three areas: privacy (how patient data is handled), consent (how patients are informed and permission is obtained), and clinical safety (how AI outputs support clinical decision-making).
For clinicians, core responsibilities remain the same, creating a crucial question:
“How do I use AI safely, compliantly, and without putting my patients or myself at risk?”
Unlike traditional software, AI tools process highly sensitive health information in real time, often via cloud-based models and third-party vendors.
This introduces risks that extend beyond the clinic. Robust governance, compliance, and data safeguards are therefore essential to ensure responsible usage isn’t just a task, but a standard that’s upheld rigorously.
Under the Privacy Act 1988 and Australian Privacy Principles, GPs are responsible for:
From a clinical governance perspective, inadequate management of data handling, consent, and information security carries legal and regulatory risk, exposing practices and clinicians to penalties, breaches, and downstream impacts on patient safety.
While consent is fundamental to general practice, AI scribes and other AI-assisted workflows change how consent is obtained, documented, and communicated.
In practice, informed consent should be:
These principles are consistent with established Australian guidance on informed consent and the handling of health information (RACGP patient consent guidance, RACGP guidance on AI scribes).
A simple explanation ensures patients understand how their information is used and gives GPs confidence that consent has been appropriately obtained.
“To help me focus fully on you, I use an AI scribe to draft consultation notes. Your information remains private, and you’re welcome to opt out at any time.”
Many practices now obtain consent prior to or during appointments, supporting transparency, streamlining consultations, and reducing medico-legal risk for GPs and the broader practice team.
AI tools can support clinical workflows, but they do not replace clinical judgement.
AHPRA guidance emphasises that GPs remain fully accountable for all clinical decisions and documentation. AI outputs should be treated as draft support and always verified by the clinician before being finalised in the patient record.
The NSQHS Standards require practices to demonstrate robust clinical governance, including risk management, staff training, and clinical oversight. AI tools should be integrated into these governance structures rather than bypassing them.
Key clinical safety considerations for GPs when evaluating AI tools:
Evaluating through this lens helps practices and clinicians enhance workflow efficiency without compromising safety, accountability, or patient trust.
Leading practices adopt AI through a structured governance approach, selecting tools designed to prioritise privacy, consent, and clinical safety.
Key components include:
Implementing these structures ensures that risks are mitigated, AI tools remain a clinical support asset, and patients maintain confidence in the care they receive.
AI tools are increasingly part of routine clinical workflows in general practice, requiring clinicians to examine and apply existing standards for privacy, consent, and clinical safety to these new technologies.
A considered approach allows practices and clinicians to realise the benefits of AI: improving efficiency, supporting the clinical experience, and enhancing patient care - while embedding regulatory, privacy, and safety safeguards from the outset.
It also sets clear expectations for vendors: practices need transparency around how AI tools handle data, support consent workflows, and maintain clinical oversight, ideally as built-in features rather than afterthoughts.
In the consulting room, AI tools should reduce cognitive lead, not add to it. When privacy, consent, and clinical safety are embedded from the outset and integrated into workflows, AI can support safer documentation while preserving what matters most - clinical judgement and patient trust.
For practical guidance, refer to the 2026 Clinician’s Checklist for Safe AI Use.
