A nonrandomized clinical trial evaluated the impact of an AI-powered clinical documentation tool, Dragon Ambient eXperience (DAX) Copilot, on clinicians' experiences with electronic health records (EHRs). The study involved 112 clinicians from North Carolina and Georgia who received training on the tool before its implementation. A control group of 117 clinicians not using the tool was also recruited. A 7-question survey was administered before and 5 weeks after the intervention to assess changes in EHR experience. Results showed that 47.1% of intervention group clinicians reported decreased time on EHRs at home, 44.7% reported decreased weekly EHR time outside normal work hours, and 43.5% reported decreased documentation time after visits. Additionally, 44.7% of intervention group clinicians reported less frustration with EHRs compared to the control group. However, 44.7% of intervention group participants and 68.7% of control group participants reported comparable EHR experiences before and after the intervention. The study found that approximately half of clinicians using the AI tool reported positive outcomes, potentially reducing burnout. However, a significant subset did not experience time-saving benefits or improved EHR experiences. Study limitations include potential selection and recall bias. Further research is needed to identify opportunities for improvement and understand the impact on different clinician subsets and health systems. The study was conducted in accordance with the TREND reporting guideline. The trial protocol was exempted by the Wake Forest University School of Medicine institutional review board and granted waiver of informed consent. The study is open access and distributed under the CC-BY License.A nonrandomized clinical trial evaluated the impact of an AI-powered clinical documentation tool, Dragon Ambient eXperience (DAX) Copilot, on clinicians' experiences with electronic health records (EHRs). The study involved 112 clinicians from North Carolina and Georgia who received training on the tool before its implementation. A control group of 117 clinicians not using the tool was also recruited. A 7-question survey was administered before and 5 weeks after the intervention to assess changes in EHR experience. Results showed that 47.1% of intervention group clinicians reported decreased time on EHRs at home, 44.7% reported decreased weekly EHR time outside normal work hours, and 43.5% reported decreased documentation time after visits. Additionally, 44.7% of intervention group clinicians reported less frustration with EHRs compared to the control group. However, 44.7% of intervention group participants and 68.7% of control group participants reported comparable EHR experiences before and after the intervention. The study found that approximately half of clinicians using the AI tool reported positive outcomes, potentially reducing burnout. However, a significant subset did not experience time-saving benefits or improved EHR experiences. Study limitations include potential selection and recall bias. Further research is needed to identify opportunities for improvement and understand the impact on different clinician subsets and health systems. The study was conducted in accordance with the TREND reporting guideline. The trial protocol was exempted by the Wake Forest University School of Medicine institutional review board and granted waiver of informed consent. The study is open access and distributed under the CC-BY License.