Doctors want to use wearables data. Health, regulatory systems aren’t ready.

Every day, wearables track millions of data points about consumers’ health. But, for the most part, doctors don’t access that information.

Only 6% of US physicians have actually integrated wearable data into clinical workflows, according to a survey released July 8 by the American Medical Association (AMA) Center for Digital Health and AI, in partnership with Medscape.

The data is being held back from clinical use because of difficulties in putting it into electronic health records, concerns about accuracy, and concerns about legal liability, AMA CEO John Whyte told Healthcare Brew.

“If it doesn’t feed into the [electronic health record] where I need it to be, I’m not going to use it. If it doesn’t help synthesize data that I can ultimately oversee, it’s not going to be as valuable,” Whyte said.

What’s the holdup? In theory, doctors across the globe are open to using the data in clinical practice.

The AMA survey polled 2,222 physicians from January to March 2026 across the US, Canada, the UK, France, Germany, and Spain, and the vast majority of physicians in all six countries reviewed patient wearable data “at least sometimes” when patients brought it in.

About 77% of the 720 US doctors polled said they see a clinical advantage to using that wearable data in patient care, the AMA survey found.

“I would have guessed, like many folks, that doctors would not be supportive of these tools,” Whyte said. “There actually is this acceptance and interest on the part of physicians and patients to utilize this data. The problem is…the system is not set up to do that.”

Many consumer wearables aren’t classified as medical devices and therefore don’t need FDA clearance, the agency clarified in January. This includes noninvasive wearables that estimate metrics like blood pressure and blood glucose.

A 2025 JAMA research letter suggests wearables that do obtain FDA clearance aren’t necessarily as accurate as medical-grade devices, Healthcare Brew previously reported.

Unanswered questions. Most physicians in the AMA survey cited randomized controlled trials as the top source of evidence that would increase their confidence in the clinical use of consumer wearable data.

For instance, the Apple Watch’s FDA-cleared hypertension risk feature correctly flagged 41% of people with undiagnosed hypertension, according to the JAMA research letter. In comparison, high-quality office blood pressure measurements correctly identified 71% in a 2023 study.

“We’re not suggesting that every watch and every tool has to undergo a rigorous FDA review process. But maybe we should stratify it based on risk,” Whyte said. “Patients interpret this information as clinically valid, and I’m not sure it is.”

In addition, as with AI, there are also unresolved questions about whether a doctor could be held legally liable if faulty wearable data leads them to make an incorrect medical diagnosis, Whyte said.

Legal liability was US physicians’ top concern: The survey reported 43% were very or extremely concerned about the issue.