Time for a National Strategy to Prepare the Future Health Workforce on AI

Every day a new article appears saying that AI is going to disrupt the future of the health workforce. This type of discussion is to be expected given that across industries including health insurance companies have announced massive layoffs of workers, citing that AI is creating operational efficiencies that are making some jobs obsolete.

There are very real opportunities for AI to reduce administrative burden experienced by both clinicians and patients when navigating our complex health care system, particularly around billing and scheduling. This burden roughly translates to an estimated $285-570 billion in wasted spending in the U.S. What has piqued many people’s interest is the way in which AI may also be going after the diagnosing, treating, and prescribing tasks of clinicians. In other words, AI has the potential to replace what is often thought of as the human-side of health care delivery, a side that has long felt protected from the advances of technology.

Where tasks are eliminated, jobs are also at risk. As we get deeper into the AI race and see what will stick, it’s time that we have a serious discussion about a national strategy to prepare the health workforce to harness the power of AI.

Have We Been Here Before? Revisiting the HITECH Act

Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 came the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH) Act to promote the adoption of health IT with a focus on interoperable electronic health records (EHRs). This significant investment by Congress provided training and incentive payments to hospitals and “eligible providers.” The incentive payments for eligible providers, which has evolved into the current Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), targeted a wide range of health professions including physicians, dentists, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and certified nurse midwives with targeted payments for providers in health centers and rural health clinics. States also received infrastructure investments, such as trainings and resource hubs, to support the health workforce in adopting EHRs.

Workforce development was another key element of HITECH. Over 20,000 new graduates over 91 institutions were trained to support and/or lead hospitals and clinics into an era of EHR adoption. In addition, curriculum and competency exams were created and distributed.

HITECH has been credited for the acceleration of EHR adoption in the U.S. and the creation of more than 50,000 health IT jobs. However, researchers have noted that EHR adoption came less from a spirit of innovation but rather from a place of enforcement and not wanting to be left behind. While EHRs did not generate as much excitement and intrigue as AI seems to be generating now, there is a familiar reticence by clinicians in engaging with AI that will likely result in the usual distribution of innovators and laggards in technology adoption.

A Strategy for the Future Health Workforce

Congress members have introduced, and re-introduced, legislation like the Workforce of the Future Act of 2025 to skill up the workforce and prepare for job displacement from AI. Guidance issued under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) has encouraged Governors to use reserve funds to support learners in the acquisition of AI skills, a topic that continues as WIOA prepares for reauthorization.

This broad-based approach set forth by Congress is necessary to skill up the workforce since the proliferation of AI goes beyond well-beyond health care, unlike EHRs being centered in health care. Parallel investments and strategy at the federal and state level are also needed to support the health workforce in preparing for this rapidly growing AI-driven economy. If done right, patient care may be more accessible and high-quality while reducing burnout and increasing job satisfaction for clinicians.

There are lessons to be learned from the HITECH Act such as focusing on outcomes rather than process, ensuring accountability, building systems rather than programs, and creating a vision for the future. We can build off the existing Office of the National Coordinator infrastructure to carry out a national strategy and leverage the MIPS program to ensure any AI adoption or use is geared towards improving quality of care. We can use WIOA to encourage state workforce boards to partner with health professional licensing boards to develop continuing education material geared toward ethical use of AI for active health professionals. Revisiting the HITECH efforts to share out curricula, we can harness the creativity and innovative thinking of our health care educators who are already actively incorporating AI topics in their curricula. These handful of ideas are only likely scratching the surface and could benefit from a national health workforce AI advisory committee who could provide the leadership in creating a strategy.

Any effort should be made with an eye on how AI can be a complement to or augment the skills of health care workers. With significant demand for health care workers, AI that replaces tasks that are below a health care worker’s scope can free up health care workers to focus on patient care should be prioritized.