Most healthcare AI discussion assumes a metropolitan context. Major teaching hospitals, large specialist workforces, robust IT infrastructure. That’s where AI development happens, where pilots run, where evidence accumulates.

But regional Australia has different realities. And if AI is going to improve healthcare broadly, not just for city-dwellers, we need to think specifically about regional challenges and opportunities.

The Infrastructure Challenge

Let’s start with the obvious: connectivity.

AI systems often require reliable, high-bandwidth network connections. Cloud-based AI needs data to move back and forth quickly. Latency matters when AI is supposed to provide real-time decision support.

Regional and rural Australia has improving but still variable connectivity. NBN coverage exists, but speeds and reliability vary. Some remote health facilities still struggle with basic connectivity.

This creates practical barriers:

• Cloud-based AI may perform poorly or inconsistently
• Large imaging files may take too long to transfer for timely AI analysis
• Real-time AI applications may have unacceptable latency

Potential solutions:

Edge computing—running AI locally rather than in the cloud—addresses some of these challenges. On-premises AI infrastructure is more expensive, but it eliminates connectivity dependencies.

Hybrid approaches—running AI locally with periodic cloud synchronisation—can work for applications that don’t require real-time connectivity.

For regions with adequate NBN connectivity, cloud-based AI works fine. The challenge is areas with poor connectivity, which often correlate with areas of greatest healthcare need.

The Workforce Challenge

Regional healthcare faces workforce shortages across almost every specialty. This creates both challenges and opportunities for AI.

The challenge: Implementing AI requires expertise. You need people who understand the technology, who can manage implementation, who can govern ongoing operation. Regional health services often lack this expertise.

Bringing in expertise is expensive. Consultants charge premiums for regional travel. Staff recruitment is harder when candidates can work in cities instead.

The opportunity: AI could help address workforce shortages. Radiology AI in a regional hospital with limited radiologist hours could provide preliminary reads while specialists are unavailable. Triage AI could support emergency departments with limited medical coverage.

The promise of AI helping with workforce shortages is real, but the implementation still requires expertise. You can’t just deploy AI and hope for the best.

Volume Economics

Many AI pricing models are based on per-study or per-case fees. This works well for high-volume metropolitan sites. A regional hospital processing one-tenth the volume pays proportionally less.

But fixed costs don’t scale the same way. Implementation effort, integration complexity, governance overhead—these are relatively fixed regardless of volume.

The economics often work against regional sites:

• Same implementation cost
• Same governance overhead
• Fraction of the volume to spread costs across

This is a genuine barrier. Regional health services often can’t justify AI investment that metropolitan sites can easily justify.

Potential solutions:

Shared services models—multiple regional sites sharing AI infrastructure and governance—could improve economics. This requires coordination that doesn’t always exist.

State health department leadership could help by centralising AI procurement and governance, spreading costs across multiple sites.

Vendors could develop pricing models that work for regional contexts—though they have limited commercial incentive to do so.

Different Clinical Priorities

AI development follows the market. Most investment goes into applications relevant to metropolitan healthcare—radiology for hospitals with high imaging volumes, pathology for sites with large specimen volumes, specialty applications for tertiary services.

Regional healthcare has different priorities:

Generalist support. Rural generalist doctors and nurses manage conditions that specialists handle in cities. AI that supports generalist practice might be more valuable than specialist AI.

Emergency and retrieval. When help is hours away by road or air, decision support during emergencies matters more. AI for pre-hospital and emergency contexts could have outsized impact.

Chronic disease management. Regional Australia has higher rates of many chronic conditions. AI for remote monitoring, diabetes management, and chronic disease prevention might deliver more benefit than acute care AI.

Telehealth augmentation. AI that enhances telehealth consultations—summarising patient history, flagging concerns, supporting remote examination—could amplify the value of limited specialist availability.

Unfortunately, these applications often get less investment because the market (metropolitan healthcare) prioritises other things.

Success Stories Worth Noting

Despite barriers, regional AI is happening:

A Queensland health service implemented diabetic retinopathy screening AI across regional and remote sites. Where specialist access was limited, AI-enabled screening identified patients needing referral. Access improved without requiring more specialists.

A New South Wales regional hospital network deployed radiology AI across multiple sites with shared governance. Costs were spread across the network, and consistent implementation improved outcomes at all sites.

Several Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations are exploring AI for culturally appropriate chronic disease management, working with AI developers to ensure relevance to their populations.

These examples share common features: they addressed genuine regional needs, they involved regional clinicians in design, and they structured costs to work at regional volumes.

What Needs to Change

For AI to benefit regional healthcare fairly:

Targeted investment. Some AI development should specifically target regional applications, not just adapt metropolitan solutions. This probably requires government or philanthropic funding—market incentives don’t naturally produce it.

Infrastructure investment. Connectivity improvements benefit AI along with everything else. Continuing NBN rollout and exploring alternative technologies for remote areas matters.

Regional voices in AI governance. National and state AI governance processes should include regional perspectives. Standards developed for metropolitan contexts don’t always translate.

Shared services models. Regional sites may not be able to afford AI individually. Collaborative models that spread costs while preserving local clinical engagement are needed.

Research in regional contexts. AI validated in metropolitan settings needs regional validation. Patient populations, clinical workflows, and technical environments differ.

AI has potential to reduce some regional healthcare disadvantages. Getting from potential to reality requires deliberate effort to overcome barriers that metropolitan sites don’t face.

---

Dr. Rebecca Liu is a health informatics specialist and former Chief Clinical Information Officer. She advises healthcare organisations on clinical AI strategy and implementation.