29 Healthcare Scheduling Statistics (2026)
Patient scheduling affects access to care and practice operations, but experiences and workflows vary by setting. These 29 findings cover wait times, channel preferences, attendance and operations. Each retains its study period and population; customer cases and observational comparisons do not establish typical or causal results.
Collection updated: October 2026
29 Healthcare Scheduling Statistics (2026) reveal key trends in scheduling and appointment management. This collection contains 29 data points. Check each source's population, reporting period and methodology before applying a figure to your business; forecasts and vendor case studies are not general industry results.
Table of Contents
Patient Access & Wait Times
Average new-patient wait across six specialties and 15 large US metropolitan areas in AMN Healthcare's January-February 2025 survey of 1,391 offices.
Respondents reporting a doctor change because of long office waits in Vitals' March 2018 poll; distinct from waiting for an appointment date.
Vitals 2018 Wait Time Report, original release reproduced by The Lund Report
Healthcare consumer respondents identifying online booking or rescheduling as influencing provider choice, in Press Ganey's Healthcare consumer experience 2025 research summarized February 17, 2026. Sample size, item count, field dates, recruitment and geography undisclosed in this summary. Does not compare convenience against reputation.
Press Ganey original 2025 consumer research summary, February 2026
Patient respondents wanting to book from home or a mobile device at any time. Preference for booking availability, not for same-day care. Experian 2025 State of Patient Access: 213 healthcare employees and 1,004 patients/guardians overall; published April 2025. Item counts, recruitment and geography undisclosed in these publisher summaries.
Experian original 2025 State of Patient Access survey summary
Patients reporting more than two minutes on hold when scheduling: 16% waited 2-5 minutes and 7% longer, in Phreesia's April-May 2018 patient survey.
Provider respondents identifying limited appointment slots as an access challenge. Provider reports, not a patient scheduling-abandonment rate. Experian 2025 State of Patient Access: 213 healthcare employees and 1,004 patients/guardians overall; published April 2025. Item counts, recruitment and geography undisclosed in these publisher summaries.
Experian original 2025 State of Patient Access survey summary
Online Scheduling in Healthcare
Patients preferring online scheduling in Phreesia's April-May 2018 survey of nearly 14,000 patients; 65% preferred phone booking.
Provider respondents reporting self-scheduling availability in Experian Health's 2024 State of Patient Access survey. Historical survey share, not a current census of all healthcare providers; this publisher summary does not give the provider sample size.
Experian Health State of Patient Access 2024, publisher summary May 21, 2024
Phreesia network patients saying they would likely book a healthcare visit online if offered the option in a survey of more than 4,000 patients published August 2022. Field dates, recruitment and item count undisclosed in this article. Stated likelihood, not observed provider switching.
No-shows for self-scheduled versus agent-scheduled visits in a Johns Hopkins Community Physicians observational study, 2019-June 2021. Cancellations were higher: 37.6% versus 27.0%; not a causal reduction estimate.
Zocdoc appointments booked between 5 p.m. and 9 a.m. in its analysis of 2023 platform activity. Booking time, not visit time; limited to Zocdoc. Booking count, geographic coverage and time-zone handling undisclosed in the publisher article; not an industry-wide estimate.
New-patient growth reported for Mind Body and Spirit Counseling Services in Palmdale, California after adopting Tebra's combined EHR, patient-experience and telehealth products. Single vendor-published case; baseline counts and comparison period undisclosed. Not an industry average or an effect isolated to online scheduling.
Tebra original customer case: Mind Body and Spirit Counseling Services
Scheduling Operations
Practice-leader respondents selecting scheduling as their most time-consuming staff phone task in MGMA's March 10, 2026 poll, with 294 applicable responses. Recruitment and geographic distribution undisclosed; sponsored by Insight Health AI. Respondent share, not the percentage of staff working time spent scheduling.
Estimated fiscal-2008 marginal no-show cost across ten clinics at the Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center; a single-system estimate, not US national annual cost.
2023 single-specialty medical-practice aggregate no-show rate in MGMA DataDive; not every healthcare setting.
Medical-group respondents reporting higher year-to-date no-show rates in 2026 than in 2025 in MGMA's August 11, 2026 poll, with 190 applicable responses. Recruitment and geographic distribution undisclosed. Share reporting an increase, not the size of the increase or annual revenue loss per physician.
Practice-leader comments accompanying MGMA's March 10, 2026 phone-task poll describe back-and-forth scheduling calls driven by limited slots and complex visit rules. Overall poll: 294 applicable responses; comment count undisclosed. Qualitative observation, not an average number of calls per appointment.
MGMA original March 2026 phone-task poll and respondent comments
Provider respondents identifying patient uptake of digital tools as their biggest challenge. This does not measure outdated scheduling systems. Experian 2025 State of Patient Access: 213 healthcare employees and 1,004 patients/guardians overall; published April 2025. Item counts, recruitment and geography undisclosed in these publisher summaries.
Experian original 2025 State of Patient Access survey summary
Technology & Automation Impact
Medical-practice leaders choosing online scheduling as their top patient-access priority for 2026; December 9, 2025 MGMA poll, 236 responses. This is not an investment-commitment measure.
Among practices using AI in patient visits, respondents reporting any staff-workload reduction in MGMA's August 5, 2025 poll; 44% reported none and 17% were unsure. Overall poll: 244 applicable responses; subgroup count and recruitment undisclosed. Self-reported benefit, not a 39% reduction in scheduling workload.
Provider respondents identifying scheduling improvements as urgent. Provider priorities, not patient demand for scheduling across all specialties. Experian 2025 State of Patient Access: 213 healthcare employees and 1,004 patients/guardians overall; published April 2025. Item counts, recruitment and geography undisclosed in these publisher summaries.
Experian original 2025 State of Patient Access survey summary
Healthcare consumer respondents identifying appointment scheduling as a leading frustration, in Press Ganey's Healthcare consumer experience 2025 research summarized February 17, 2026. Sample size, item count, field dates, recruitment and geography undisclosed in this summary. Frustration prevalence, not satisfaction improvement from automation.
Press Ganey original 2025 consumer research summary, February 2026
NextPatient's July 8, 2025 case study reports reduced referral-related outbound calls and phone tag at Eye Surgical Associates, a three-location, 12-provider ophthalmology practice. Vendor-published qualitative result; call counts, comparison period and geographic location undisclosed. Does not establish a 50% reduction or typical results.
NextPatient original Eye Surgical Associates case study, July 2025
Referral-capture increase reported for call-center deployments at one unnamed large US health system in Experian's December 2020 patient-scheduling case study. More than 140 hospitals, 900 ambulatory facilities and 2,250 providers online. Baseline counts, comparison dates and controls undisclosed; vendor case, not revenue growth or typical scheduling-software results.
Experian original large-health-system case study, December 2020
Patient Scheduling Preferences
Respondents wanting healthcare texts, including appointment confirmations and reminders, in the March 2021 HIMSS/Solutionreach survey of 250 US consumers. The question also covered instructions and notifications; not a reminder-only preference.
HIMSS/Solutionreach Patient Communication Preferences in 2021, page 7
Phreesia network patients saying they would likely reschedule a healthcare visit online if offered the option in a survey of more than 4,000 patients published August 2022. Field dates, recruitment and item count undisclosed in this article. Intention, not actual online-rescheduling use.
Phreesia network patient respondents preferring doctors offering online check-in in a survey of more than 4,000 patients published August 2022. Field dates, recruitment and item count undisclosed in the article. Check-in preference, not a general expectation of all digital communication.
Phreesia network patient respondents saying they would consider changing providers to access online check-in, in a survey of more than 4,000 patients published August 2022. Field dates, recruitment and item count undisclosed. All surveyed patients, not millennials; check-in preference, not observed switching for a portal.
Among Phreesia survey respondents who scheduled online, those citing being faster than calling as a reason, in research published August 2022. More than 4,000 network patients overall; subgroup count, field dates and recruitment undisclosed. Perceived channel speed, not scheduling experience determining care-quality judgments.
What the Data Tells Us
AMN's January-February 2025 survey found a 31-day average new-patient wait across six specialties in 15 large US metros. Vitals' March 2018 doctor-switching finding concerns office waits, a different measure.
Phreesia's April-May 2018 survey found 18% preferred online booking and 65% preferred phone booking. Its separate August 2022 summary found 84% would likely book online if offered; preference and intention are different questions.
The $14.58 million no-show cost estimate concerns fiscal 2008 at ten clinics in one VA medical center. MGMA's 2023 single-specialty aggregate no-show rate was 6.81%; neither is a universal benchmark.
Johns Hopkins' 2019-June 2021 observational study found 2.7% versus 4.6% no-shows for self-scheduled versus agent-scheduled visits, but 37.6% versus 27.0% cancellations. These comparisons do not establish causation.
In MGMA's March 10, 2026 poll of 294 applicable respondents, 31% selected scheduling as their most time-consuming staff phone task. This is a share of respondents, not of staff working time.
Tebra's 80% new-patient growth and Experian's 25% referral-capture increase describe separate vendor customer cases involving broader systems. They do not establish typical revenue growth or an isolated scheduling effect.
Explore Scheduling Tools
See how SchedulingKit helps businesses like yours.
Frequently Asked Questions
Explore More Resources — Statistics
34 Appointment No-Show Statistics Every Business Should Know (2026)
34 no-show statistics on rates, costs and reminders, including a VA study estimating $196 per missed visit in 2008. Sources and populations explained.
38 Online Scheduling Statistics for 2026
38 scheduling statistics on online booking and adoption. Zeeg found 33% of bookings outside weekday 08:00-18:00 in its September 2025-August 2026 data.
30 AI Receptionist & Virtual Assistant Statistics (2026)
30 AI receptionist statistics and research context, including GVR's 2025 forecast of 23.7% annual growth for broader conversational AI through 2030.
32 Small Business Scheduling Statistics (2026)
32 small business scheduling statistics and research context. Calendly's 2024 survey found 43% of respondents spent at least 3 hours weekly scheduling.
Further Reading
Ready to Improve Your Numbers?
Manage appointment availability, confirmations and reminders with SchedulingKit. Free includes one member, one event type, one calendar and 50 bookings per month. Paid capabilities and AI add-ons have separate requirements; business results depend on your workflow.
Free forever plan available • No credit card required