Private Practices Face AI Adoption Gap

June 5, 2025

·

4 minutes

AI Adoption in Health Care: A Growing Divide Between Hospitals and Private Practice

 

As artificial intelligence (AI) makes strides in clinical care, a new report from the American Medical Association (AMA) reveals a troubling reality: while interest in AI is high across the profession, adoption is largely confined to hospital settings, leaving independent practices lagging behind.

 

Drawing from the 2023 AMA Digital Health Research study, the findings underscore a technological rift in U.S. healthcare. Most physicians report optimism about AI’s potential, but access to these tools remains deeply uneven depending on where and how physicians practice.

 

Physicians Are Eager, But Unequally Equipped

 

According to the report, 65% of physicians believe AI brings clinical advantages—ranging from streamlined documentation to smarter diagnostics and more coordinated care.

 

“The data show enthusiasm,” the article notes, “but access remains an issue for most independent physicians.”

 

That enthusiasm has translated into action—at least for some. Nearly 4 in 10 hospital-based physicians report access to advanced tools like AI-assisted diagnostics or workflow enhancers. By comparison, just 1 in 10 physicians in solo or small group practices say the same.

 

“Smaller practices often lack the staff and systems needed to evaluate, integrate and sustain new technology.”

 

The disparity isn’t just technical—it reflects systemic differences in funding, infrastructure, and internal support. Hospitals often have built-in IT teams, training resources, and financial leverage. Small practices, meanwhile, are left navigating implementation challenges with minimal help.

 

The Trust Gap and Cautious Adoption

Even where tools are available, trust remains a hurdle. Some AI solutions—like those used in documentation, imaging, or patient scheduling—are already showing value. But many physicians are hesitant to rely on tools that operate like black boxes.

 

“Physicians want tools they can trust—tools that are transparent and clinically validated,” an AMA contributor explains.

 

Concerns linger over how AI decisions are made, whether algorithms are clinically sound, and how they’ll impact physician-patient relationships. For small practices especially, the margin for error is thin—and skepticism is healthy.

 

Steps Forward for Independent Practices

The AMA recommends a phased, pragmatic approach for small practices looking to integrate AI. Begin with focused use cases—such as ambient clinical documentation or triage support—and expand gradually. Leadership engagement, careful financial planning, and ongoing feedback loops are key to success.

 

“We may see a future in which only large, well-funded systems benefit from AI, widening disparities in care delivery,” the article concludes.

 

Without targeted vendor support and policy alignment, AI may become yet another factor deepening inequities in healthcare delivery. The report serves as both a warning and a call to action—ensuring that innovation is accessible, not exclusive.

Read the original article here:

Related Posts

Blog Post Image

March 25, 2026

·

6 min

When AI Alerts Override Clinical Judgment, Who's Liable?

AI-driven sepsis flags, wearable monitors generating false positives, and agentic systems replacing nurse calls—clinical AI is accelerating without sufficient validation.

Blog Post Image

March 20, 2026

·

6 min

Performance Drives Patient Trust More Than Governance

A national survey of 3,000 U.S. adults reveals that AI performance — not FDA approval or physician oversight — is the single strongest driver of patient trust in medical AI. AI performing at specialist level increased visit selection by 32.5%, a finding with direct implications for how practices deploy and communicate AI tools.

Blog Post Image

March 10, 2026

·

5 min

AI Health Tools Are Here—But Are They Clinically Ready?

ChatGPT Health launched in January 2026—but a new study reveals it failed to properly triage the most and least serious cases.

Blog Post Image

March 4, 2026

·

7 min

Food Is Medicine: The $1.1T Case for Clinical Action Now

Poor diet drives CVD, type 2 diabetes, and stroke—costing $1.1 trillion annually in the US alone. A landmark JAMA Health Forum special communication argues that physicians now have the policy tools, EHR infrastructure, and clinical workflows to make "Food is Medicine" a standard of care—if they choose to act.

Blog Post Image

February 24, 2026

·

6 min

AI Scribes Capture More Symptoms—But Treat Fewer Patients

AI ambient scribes produce richer psychiatric documentation across all 6 neuropsychiatric domains—yet AI-scribed visits were 17% less likely to result in a depression diagnosis, new prescription, or behavioral health referral. Documentation and action are diverging.

Blog Post Image

February 11, 2026

·

4 min

Telehealth Cuts Both Good and Bad Tests—What Physicians Must Know

A landmark JAMA Network Open study of 22,547 propensity-matched annual visits reveals that virtual visits reduce high-value test ordering by 14.3% and low-value test ordering by 19.3% compared with in-person visits. Telehealth's promise as a care-quality lever is more complicated—and more consequential—than previously understood.