Ambient AI scribes listen to conversations between clinicians and patients and automatically generate clinical notes. Their use is expanding across medicine, including dermatology, with the goal of reducing documentation time and allowing clinicians to focus more directly on patients.
However, a proposed class action lawsuit in California has raised concerns about consent, privacy, data storage, and the accuracy of AI-generated records.
What Happened?
A patient sued Sharp Healthcare, alleging that an AI transcription tool called Abridge recorded his visit without his knowledge or consent. He reportedly discovered the tool had been used only after reviewing his clinical notes.
The lawsuit claims the recording captured sensitive information, including symptoms, diagnoses, treatment plans, personal identifiers, and other details discussed during the appointment. It also alleges that vendor personnel outside the patient’s direct care team may have had access to the information.
According to the patient, the AI-generated note included a statement saying he had been informed of and consented to the recording, even though he says that conversation never occurred.
These allegations have not been proven in court.
The Consent Questions
California generally requires all parties to consent before a private conversation is recorded.
The lawsuit alleges that the patient received no clear notice, signed authorization, meaningful opportunity to consent, or option to decline. It also raises questions about how long recordings remain on vendor servers and whether they are fully deleted upon request.
Why This Matters in Dermatology
Dermatology visits may involve highly personal discussions about skin cancer, medications, mental health, body image, scarring, hair loss, or cosmetic concerns.
Ambient AI may be used during appointments such as:
- Full-body skin examinations
- Skin cancer and biopsy consultations
- Acne and hair loss visits
- Hidradenitis suppurativa consultations
- Cosmetic treatment consultations
Patients may not expect these conversations to be recorded, processed, or temporarily stored by a third-party vendor.
What Patients Can Ask
Patients may want to ask:
- Is an AI scribe being used?
- Is audio recorded or only transcribed?
- Where is the information stored?
- How long is it retained?
- Who can access it?
- Can I decline without affecting my care?
- How can I request deletion?
What Practices Should Consider
Practices should clearly explain:
- That an AI documentation tool is being used
- Whether audio is recorded
- How the information is processed and stored
- Whether a third-party vendor receives the data
- How long the data is retained
- Whether the patient may opt out
- How the visit will be documented if the patient declines
Consent should be obtained before the tool begins listening. A general privacy notice or waiting-room sign may not provide enough information for patients to make a meaningful choice.
AI Notes Still Require Review
The allegation that the system inserted a false consent statement also highlights the risk of inaccurate AI-generated documentation.
Clinicians remain responsible for reviewing notes for:
- Incorrect or invented statements
- Missing symptoms or history
- Medication errors
- Inaccurate consent language
- Mischaracterized treatment discussions
AI-generated notes should be treated as drafts, not unquestioned records of what occurred.
Ambient AI may reduce documentation burden, but its benefits do not replace the need for transparency, patient choice, secure data handling, and clinician review.
Reference
- Hagen J. “Patient Files Lawsuit Against Sharp Healthcare for Ambient AI Use.” MobiHealthNews.
Leave A Comment