Join/Renew

Career Center

Donate

My WSMA
WSMA home
WSMA home
News

image of gavel with stethoscope and lawbook

Washington Court Rules Ambient AI Recordings Are Exempt From Patient Record Disclosure

Earlier this summer, the WSMA was approached to provide an amicus brief in a precedent-setting matter involving the disclosure of an ambient AI recording.

Under the Uniform Health Care Information Act, Washington patients have a right to obtain health care information from a physician or health care provider, but there are exceptions to that right. First, if information is not maintained by the physician in the requested form, the physician is not required to create a new record or reformulate an existing record. Second, a physician may deny access to information if the physician reasonably concludes that it was “compiled and used solely for litigation, quality assurance, peer review or administrative purposes.” (70.02.090)

In this case, the question before the court was the meaning of “administrative purpose.” The judge agreed with the defendant clinic and amici that the DAX recording was an administrative tool, specifically finding:

“The Court finds that the use of the DAX recording to assist physicians in preparing the written record of a patient encounter is an ‘administrative purpose.’ Thus, the DAX recording is exempt from disclosure under the Uniform Health Care Information Act.”

This precedent-setting ruling should help resolve this issue favorably if it arises again in the future.

As the WSMA, the AMA Litigation Center, and the Washington State Hospital Association pointed out in their amicus brief:

“An ambient documentation system captures a clinical interaction, generates draft or intermediate materials, and those materials are then reviewed and incorporated into a physician-authenticated record. Medical practice has long involved preliminary and intermediate documentation tools – dictation, handwritten notes and other aids – to assist in creating the final medical chart, but are not themselves treated as the chart. Ambient AI simply updates that same process with a new technology, but the distinction between the record of care and the process of producing that record is not. Only the physician’s final entry reflects their professional judgment and becomes the authoritative clinical note.”

The ruling provides important clarity for physicians and health care organizations using ambient AI tools for clinical documentation. It recognizes the distinction between the authoritative medical record and the technology and intermediate materials used to create that record.

More WSMA legal victories

To read about other recent WSMA legal victories see:

Tagged , , ,