← Risk register SOC 31-9099 · reviewed 2026-08-11

Healthcare Support Workers, All Other

109,740 US workers · median $48,430/yr · Healthcare Support

EXPOSED

This is a residual bucket — sterile processing techs, dialysis and patient care aides, optometric and podiatric assistants, hospital transport and clinical support staff — so the modal worker spends most of the shift physically in a clinical space handling instruments, equipment, and patients. That embodiment is the real moat: robotics cannot yet strip a bed, position a patient, or reprocess a tray in a crowded OR corridor. What is exposed is the paperwork layer around it: intake forms, supply logs, scheduling, insurance data entry, and standard-protocol documentation, plus the fact that almost none of these roles carry a personal license or signature liability.

10-year outlook: Employment holds or grows because the physical work is stubborn and demographics push demand, but the clerical half of these jobs thins out and the durable pay sits in the certified technical roles.

US employment, 2019–2025+17.7%
93,270109,740 workers

Headcount grew steadily across the period.

Median pay $38,460 → $48,430 +0.7% in real terms (nominal +25.9%, less ~25% US inflation over the period)

The job count is not the verdict

This line is counted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics — the one figure on this page that isn't a judgement of ours. Headcount moves on demand, offshoring, demographics and the business cycle, and automation is one term among several, often not the loudest.

So a falling line is not evidence that AI did it, and a rising one is not evidence that it won't. Both happen in this register: some occupations resist automation and shrink anyway, others are highly automatable and keep growing. The marked year is 2020.

BLS projection, 2024–2034

+3.5% 109,700 → 113,500 on the projections basis

Growing, and only partly exposed

The BLS expects +3.5% more of these jobs by 2034, and at 51/100 the work is only partly exposed — some tasks are automatable, the core of the job is not. Nothing here is in tension.

Different clocks. The score is what current AI could do to this work today. The projection is how many of these jobs will exist in 2034. Everything between the two — how fast employers actually adopt, whether demand grows in the meantime — is why they can point opposite ways without either being wrong.

~14,400 openings a year on average, including replacing people who leave.

One email if this score changes. Watch as many occupations as you like from the same address — no account, and nothing is sent on a schedule, only when a verdict actually moves.

Also known as — 24 job titles this covers

Titles reported by people doing this work, from the US Department of Labor's O*NET survey. If your job title is here, this page is about your work even though the name doesn't match.

CasterPhlebotomistTherapy AideNurse LiaisonOrthotic AideNutrition AideBirth AttendantHealth PromoterProsthetic AideMorgue AttendantSpeech AssistantTransfusion AideBlood Bank WorkerBaby Formula MixerFormula TechnicianLanguage AssistantOrthotic AssistantPublic Health AideBaby Formula WorkerDietitian AssistantHospital TechnicianPathology AssistantPatient TransporterPediatric Associate

This is a catch-all code, not a single job

The BLS uses Healthcare Support Workers, All Other for work that doesn't fit any named occupation, so it covers roles that have little in common with each other. Two consequences worth knowing before you read anything below:

If a more specific occupation on the register describes what you actually do, that page is the one to trust.

Score — 51/100 resistance

Holding it up: embodiment (17/20). Weakest point: liability shield (4/20).

Five dimensions, 0–20 each, summed. Higher means more protected. The arithmetic is shown so you can check it: 13 + 17 + 4 + 11 + 6 = 51. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 13/20

Mixed — a routine tier and a judgment tier At 13 the physical core — decontaminating and assembling instrument trays, transferring and positioning patients, prepping exam rooms, stocking crash carts — is not touchable by software, but the shift also contains genuinely automatable blocks: barcode supply reconciliation, sterilizer cycle logging, appointment reminders, and typing intake answers into the EHR, which is why it sits just below the resistant band rather than at 16+.

Embodiment 17/20

Hands-on in uncontrolled environments 17 reflects that the work happens in decontam rooms, dialysis bays, OR corridors and patient bedsides — wet floors, contaminated sharps, uncooperative or sedated bodies, equipment that has to be lifted and wheeled through crowded halls — an environment nobody has succeeded in structuring for a machine; it is short of 20 only because some sub-roles (optometric and podiatric assistants) work in calmer, more predictable clinic space.

Liability shield 4/20

No licence, no signature requirement 4 is right because these titles need no state license: CBSPD or HSPA certification for sterile processing is employer-preferred and increasingly required by hospital policy, but it is not a statute, and when a tray comes back with bioburden or a patient is dropped, the liability lands on the hospital and the supervising RN or surgeon, not on a credential you personally hold.

Trust premium 11/20

Some relationship component 11 sits mid-band because dialysis and patient care aides see the same patients three times a week for years and that continuity genuinely matters to compliance and comfort, but the assignment is made by the schedule, not by the patient asking for you — sterile processing and transport work is anonymous to the patient entirely.

Judgment & accountability 6/20

Executes defined procedures on defined inputs 6 matches the fact that nearly every consequential decision is written down somewhere — AAMI ST79 reprocessing steps, manufacturer IFUs, dialysis machine alarm protocols, two-person lift policies — and the standing instruction when something is off-protocol is to stop and escalate to the nurse rather than to decide.

Confidence: medium · reviewed 2026-08-11 · how scoring works

What this job involves — and which parts are yours

The verdict above describes this occupation as a whole. Almost nobody does the typical version of a job — tick what's actually in your week and see how your own mix sits.

AI already does these at usable quality

These still need a person

Active moats on the surviving side: embodiment, physical-presence, trust

How to future-proof this job

Where to go deeper on what this job runs on: Coursera — active listening and communication skills free to audit · Khan Academy — reading and vocabulary, all levels, free free · Toastmasters — public speaking practice at local clubs worldwide low · Khan Academy — reading and vocabulary, all levels, free free · Coursera — active listening and communication skills free to audit · Coursera — communication and interpersonal skills free to audit

All 35 skills ranked by how many jobs they open →

What would move this back up — beyond any one person

The moves above are yours to make. This is the other half: what would have to change in the world for the occupation itself to score higher. None of it is in any one person's gift, but it is where the floor actually comes from. Scores here are not a one-way ratchet. Only two of the five dimensions — task resistance and embodiment — track what machines can do. The other three track law, what buyers will pay for, and who is answerable, and those move in both directions, often in response to the same pressure AI creates. If every lever below landed, this occupation would score around 64/100, still EXPOSED.

4 specific changes that would raise this score
  • already happening task resistance +3

    Genuine two-tier structure here: if intake forms, supply logs, scheduling and insurance data entry are absorbed by ambient documentation tools, the residual shift is instrument inspection under magnification, decontamination judgment on unfamiliar loaner trays, patient positioning and de-escalation — the tier AI cannot reach. Task-mix shift, no law needed, but it also shrinks headcount while raising per-worker resistance.

  • plausible liability shield +5

    Sterile processing is the one sub-occupation with a live credentialing route: New Jersey, New York, Connecticut and Tennessee already statutorily require CRCST/HSPA certification for central service techs, and HSPA lobbies state-by-state for more. If additional states mandate certification AND facility accreditation (AAMI ST79 / Joint Commission) requires a named certified tech to sign each load-release record with personal accountability for a failed biological indicator, the shield rises for that slice. Dialysis techs have a parallel path via CMS ESRD Conditions for Coverage requiring state-approved certification.

  • plausible judgment accountability +4

    If load-release, instrument-defect rejection, or dialysis pre-treatment patient assessment (vitals, access-site condition, deciding to escalate to the RN before cannulation) becomes a documented, individually attributed stop-the-line authority under facility policy or a CMS survey deficiency finding, the role owns a consequential ambiguous call rather than executing a checklist.

  • plausible embodiment +1

    Little headroom — already 17. Rises marginally only if surgical volume shifts toward robotic and loaner-heavy cases requiring more complex manual reprocessing of delicate, non-standard instrument sets.

The limit. Ceiling is structural: this is a residual SOC bucket, so any lever only reaches one sub-occupation at a time. Sterile processing and dialysis have real credentialing momentum; hospital transport and specialty-office assistants have essentially none and would stay near current scores. The bucket average cannot move much above the mid-60s even if every plausible lever fires, and the biggest realistic threat is not robotics but staffing-ratio compression as the documentation tier disappears.

These are conditions, not forecasts — what would have to happen, not what will. Specific rules, cases and bills are named so you can go and check whether they exist and where they stand; verify before relying on any of them. Nothing here is legal or financial advice.

Where this work is, and what it pays there

BLS metro figures for 277 areas. The verdict above does not change by city — the rubric judges what the work involves, not where it happens — but pay and headcount do, and the national median hides a very wide range.

Most of these jobs

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA 11,760 $49,130 +1%
New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ 5,090 $57,820 +19%
Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands, TX 2,380 $40,710 -16%
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler, AZ 2,240 $47,890 -1%
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 2,180 $56,660 +17%
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 2,180 $66,520 +37%
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 2,080 $48,190 +0%
Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD 1,980 $40,540 -16%

Best paid

Napa, CA 100 $76,490 +58%
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 2,180 $66,520 +37%
Springfield, MA 150 $65,760 +36%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $48,430. Counts are jobs in that metro, not vacancies. Metros where the BLS suppressed the cell are absent rather than shown as zero.

Who is actually doing this — nobody, on the record

We have no reported case of a named organisation automating this occupation. Not one deployment, not one announcement.

That is worth saying out loud next to a score of 51. The verdict above is about what the work exposes — what current AI could do to these tasks. It is not a claim that anyone has done it. For this occupation those two things have come apart completely: the capability argument is on this page, and the evidence column is empty.

Read that as a gap in the reporting we can see, not proof of absence — the dispatch runs on English-language feeds and misses plenty. If you know of a case, tell us, or add a field report from inside the job.

Quick take — do you do this job?

Has AI actually changed your work? One tap, anonymous, and the running tally is public. Nothing else is asked of you.

Self-reported and unverified — a sentiment signal, not a survey. One response per person per occupation; you can change your answer.

Field reports — what people say has changed

No field reports yet. A written account takes a paragraph rather than a tap, goes to an editor before it appears, and is the one thing on this page the rubric cannot produce on its own.

File a field report

Concrete beats general: a tool that arrived, a task that moved, a headcount decision you watched happen. Don't include anything that identifies you or your employer if that would put you at risk.

Watch this verdict
Kept current

Rather than check back: get the digest and we'll tell you what changed — or watch a single occupation from its own page.