This site is intended for health professionals only


GPs raise concerns about AI prioritisation for ambulance callouts

GPs raise concerns about AI prioritisation for ambulance callouts
via Getty Images

Exclusive Local GP leaders have expressed concerns about a plan to use AI to prioritise ambulance callouts, arguing it could ‘undermine confidence’ in the health service.

One ICB has set out plans to overhaul urgent care, including ambulance services using artificial intelligence and advanced analytics ‘to only send a crew when required’.

Sussex ICB said that it is planning to move towards a model of ‘digital first access’ to urgent and emergency care.

In a plan presented to the board, it said that as part of this the NHS app would ‘support patients to find the most appropriate service based on their need’ and that ambulance services would ‘use AI and advanced analytics to only send a crew when required based on patient need and use’.

But the local LMC told Pulse that turning to AI solutions when the problem is a lack of resources is ‘a false dawn’.

One of the ‘key’ aspects of the plan is for staff to ‘utilise voice technology to direct patients to the most appropriate setting’ and ‘AI to manage appropriate navigation and resolution’ of issues.

The plan said: ‘Enhancing the digital first function in Sussex will allow care to be delivered in the most appropriate setting and reduce ED attendances.’

It also said that shared patient record and information will be ‘critical’ to delivering the models described in the plan but that the ICB will be ‘clear who is responsible for data and how AI is used’.

There will also be an ‘agreement on when and where AI should be used’ and a ‘common data dictionary and standards’ to make AI ‘more effective’, the plan added.

Surrey and Sussex LMCs chief executive Dr Julius Parker told Pulse that AI solutions will only work within properly funded services.

He said: ‘Although the use of AI and advanced analytics may have a role in assessing an individual’s need for care, it is important this does not replace, nor is seen as a substitute, for humanity in its broadest sense. 

‘A “computer says no” approach to one of our most fundamental needs, care when we are unwell, and at our most vulnerable, would be the unacceptable face of the NHS. It will undermine confidence in the healthcare system.

‘Turning to AI solutions when the problem is a lack of resources, both of workforce and infrastructure, as is identified within the surveys undertaken, is a false dawn. AI solutions will work best within a properly funded, caring services that are available when needed.

‘Displacing care from one under resourced service to another will do nothing for patients and those who provide their care.’

The ICB said that community feedback from over 20 engagement events between July 2019 to 2024 ‘highlighted some common patient concerns’ with accessing urgent care – including same-day GP appointments being ‘unavailable’ and vulnerable patients struggling to access GP care.

However, the plan set out that ‘virtual and in person urgent care and advice’ will continue to be delivered through community services, including same day primary care.

It said that the new model will reduce the ‘avoidable attendances at ED’ by delivering ‘a quick and trusted service’ through ‘a virtual mechanism’ that directs patients to services in a community setting where necessary or provide advice and guidance.

South East Coast Ambulance Service (SECAmb) told Pulse the AI approach detailed in the ICB plan is currently not in place.

A spokesperson said: ‘We are in the very early stages of exploring how the use of AI could improve our overall response to patients.’

Last month, the World Health Organisation (WHO) warned that the rapid rise of AI in healthcare is happening without the basic legal safety nets needed to protect patients and health workers.

It comes after the Government said it support the rollout of AI tools in GP practices over the next two years, in a bid to save clinicians’ time.


			

READERS' COMMENTS [4]

Please note, only GPs are permitted to add comments to articles

So the bird flew away 7 January, 2026 1:39 pm

Fed up with this continual Govt-inspired topdown drip feed of AI scams (sorry, schemes) being the solution to “life as we know it”. Most AI is still in its infancy, “learning” models (like a 5 year old kid) but requiring huge amounts of Our private data inputs. Whose money is in these schemes – public or private? Who will own the sovereign data that will be fed into these child-like Turing machines? Who profits? US corporates? Palantir? AWS? If a wrong decision and a mistake is made by eAmbulanceAI and consequently a patient dies, who’ll be taken to court ?corporate manslaughter.
Tim Berners-Lee gave the www free to the world. Why don’t we have a UK program of research and publicly owned/funded AI as a public good?
Don’t be too surprised if China, as a strategic and dramatic Go move beats the US corporates at the AI game, and then offers many AI tools for Free to the world and open-source (no doubt, it’ll make its money back through commodification of our living behaviours). We’ll have sold ourselves down the river to US corporates who’ll have profits++, our data and our sovereignty.
The Govt needs to stop kowtowing to the US and stop pushing AI (like a drug-dealer) and get back to getting the basics of governing and leadership right.

Nick Mann 7 January, 2026 3:07 pm

Hard agree. I suspect Trusts remain the fall-guys when it hits the fan, which is wrong because this is a failure of safety, performance and governance regulation at government level.
When I had a stroke (and told the call handler I’m a doctor), the well established algorithm said ‘no’ and refused to send a 999 ambulance.
AI inputs rely on patients’ descriptions of their diagnosis. Crap in, crap out.
The false-flag saviour of Medicine-patient interfaces through AI technology is the dumb leading the blind.
McKinsey consulting are deeply involved in the promotion and marketing of Palantir and many other ‘innovative’ replacements for medical care. They are also riddled with NHS Senior management and government policy advisors.
MHRA has been either dumb or complicit in failing to maintain safe patient care, despite having a simple and clear regulatory framework.
The longer this persists the higher the true costs of remedy will be.

Vicky Cleak 7 January, 2026 6:37 pm

Where are the Royal Colleges/ CQC and BMA in all this?
Asleep behind the wheel.
AI could really help as a tool to reduce administrative mountain of our everyday lives. Instead it is been oversold as replacement for people.
It’s bad for all of us. Viva la revolution.

James Weems 8 January, 2026 8:15 pm

Can’t see this going wrong at all…