CMS has floated the idea of letting artificial intelligence play a larger role in Medicare's annual wellness visit (AWV). In its proposed physician payment rule, the agency asks whether clinical AI could shift the AWV from a single, point-in-time assessment to a more continuous, data-driven, and beneficiary-specific preventive care function. Potential uses include collecting patient-reported information before the visit, identifying who needs extra assessment, and generating follow-up steps for clinicians to review.
The proposal stems from mixed evidence on the AWV's effectiveness. CMS notes that some studies link the visit to increased use of preventive services, while others find no substantive improvement in screening, acute care use, or spending—and possibly more low-value care. At a recent conference, CMS deputy administrator Stephanie Carlton said only about half of seniors use the AWV and there's not good evidence it leads to better outcomes, calling that "a huge opportunity for AI."
The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) takes a cautiously positive stance. It supports AI tools that identify eligible patients, summarize health information, flag preventive care gaps, support documentation, and facilitate follow-up, saying these could reduce administrative burden. But the group stresses that an AWV is more than a checklist—it's a chance to integrate preventive care with a patient's history, chronic conditions, and long-term goals. AAFP worries that letting AI vendors or third parties independently deliver significant portions of preventive care could fragment records, duplicate services, and weaken the continuity and accountability that come from an established primary care relationship.
CMS is expected to release the final payment regulation around November 1. The agency has asked for comments on whether current supervision requirements create barriers to innovative delivery models where AI companies affiliate with Medicare-enrolled providers. AAFP urges CMS to ensure any technology-enabled approach strengthens, rather than bypasses, the patient's existing primary care team. The source article does not report any other stakeholder positions, so it's unclear how other groups view the proposal. The final rule will show whether CMS incorporates these concerns.