← Risk register SOC 29-1126 · reviewed 2026-08-11

Respiratory Therapists

139,790 US workers · median $82,280/yr · Healthcare

SAFE

The core of the job is physical: suctioning airways, managing ventilator circuits at the bedside, delivering nebulized meds, drawing and interpreting arterial blood gases, assisting intubation, and running codes. AI can already draft charting, calculate weaning parameters, flag vent alarms, and score sleep studies, but nothing automates a hands-on airway emergency in an ICU. State licensure plus RRT credentialing means a human is legally on the hook for therapy delivered under physician order.

10-year outlook: Demand grows with an aging, COPD-heavy population; AI takes over the charting and vent-data monitoring layer, which likely makes each therapist cover more patients rather than replacing any of them.

US employment, 2019–2025+5.8%
132,090139,790 workers

Headcount grew steadily across the period.

Median pay $61,330 → $82,280 +7.3% in real terms (nominal +34.2%, 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

+12.1% 139,600 → 156,400 on the projections basis

Hard to automate, and growing

The work resists current AI and the BLS projects +12.1% more of these jobs by 2034. Note that safe does not mean well paid — several of the fastest-growing resistant occupations are among the lowest paid on the register.

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.

~8,800 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 — 13 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.

Staff TherapistOxygen TherapistInhalation TherapistRespiratory Therapist (RT)Staff Respiratory TherapistTravel Respiratory TherapistHospital Respiratory TherapistRespiratory Care Practitioner (RCP)Certified Respiratory Therapist (CRT)Registered Respiratory Therapist (RRT)Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation Respiratory TherapistTravel Registered Respiratory Therapist (Travel RRT)NICU Respiratory Therapist (Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Respiratory Therapist)

Score — 78/100 resistance

Holding it up: embodiment (19/20). Weakest point: trust premium (14/20).

Five dimensions, 0–20 each, summed. Higher means more protected. The arithmetic is shown so you can check it: 15 + 19 + 15 + 14 + 15 = 78. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 15/20

Tasks largely resist digitisation Closed-loop ventilator modes (ASV, SmartCare), auto-scored polysomnography, and protocol-driven weaning have already eaten the calculation and documentation layer, but the 12-hour shift is still physically titrating PEEP at the bedside, breaking down a circuit that's rainout-flooded, bagging a desaturating patient during a turn, and performing bronchial hygiene on a post-op patient who won't cough — which is why this sits at 15 rather than in the low mixed band.

Embodiment 19/20

Hands-on in uncontrolled environments Nasotracheal suctioning, mask-fitting for BiPAP on an agitated patient, radial artery puncture, hand-bagging during transport down a hallway to CT, and neonatal surfactant administration are all done with your hands on an unstable human body in a room whose conditions you don't control, which is about as embodied as clinical work gets short of surgery.

Liability shield 15/20

Licensed human required and personally liable All 50 states except Alaska license respiratory care, NBRC RRT/CRT credentialing gates hiring, and your license is what's on the line if you extubate early or misread an ABG — the 15 rather than 19 reflects that you practice under physician order and institutional protocol, so the intensivist absorbs the diagnostic decision you're executing.

Trust premium 14/20

The human relationship is the product Home-vent families, cystic fibrosis clinic patients, and pulmonary rehab cohorts learn your name and your technique, and a COPD patient's willingness to tolerate NIV often turns on who's coaching them through the first ten minutes.

Judgment & accountability 15/20

Exists to be accountable for ambiguous calls You decide when a weaning trial has failed before the numbers say so, whether a rising CO2 warrants escalating to intubation now or riding out one more hour of BiPAP, and how to manage an airway you can't secure — calls made in minutes at the bedside, with the physician often at the other end of a phone.

Confidence: high · 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, licensure, 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 · Coursera — critical thinking and logic, audit free free to audit · edX — performance measurement and evaluation free to audit · Toastmasters — public speaking practice at local clubs worldwide low · Khan Academy — reading and vocabulary, all levels, free free · MIT OpenCourseWare — full course materials across every department, free free

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 86/100, still SAFE.

3 specific changes that would raise this score
  • already happening judgment accountability +3

    Formal RT-led protocol authority — rapid response / airway teams and ventilator liberation protocols where the RRT independently titrates and decides extubation readiness under standing order rather than per-order execution; AARC has pushed 'protocol-directed therapy' and some systems already run RT-driven weaning and RT-led ECMO specialist roles

  • already happening task resistance +2

    Task-mix shift: if AI absorbs the routine tier (sleep study scoring, vent flowsheet charting, nebulizer round documentation, ABG trend interpretation), the residual day is airway emergencies, difficult intubations, ECMO circuit management, and neonatal transport — the judgment tier. Watch for hospitals folding scored polysomnography and charting into software while RT FTEs shift to ICU/ECMO/transport

  • plausible liability shield +3

    State practice acts or Joint Commission standards explicitly requiring an RRT (not an RN or tech) to verify and countersign closed-loop ventilator weaning adjustments made by algorithmic modes (e.g., Hamilton INTELLiVENT-ASV, Draeger SmartCare) before they persist; several state respiratory care boards already restrict ventilator management to licensed RTs, and CMS conditions of participation could name the credential for AI-assisted settings

The limit. Trust premium has no realistic route: patients are intubated, sedated, or coding and do not choose or pay for their respiratory therapist; the buyer is a hospital cost center. Embodiment is already near ceiling at 19. Note that the biggest risk to this occupation is not AI substitution but staffing-ratio dilution — algorithmic vent management used to justify covering more beds per RT, which shrinks headcount without touching any dimension score.

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 7,010 $104,640 +27%
New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ 7,010 $110,490 +34%
Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands, TX 3,630 $80,450 -2%
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN 3,620 $87,060 +6%
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 3,010 $84,080 +2%
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 2,990 $88,790 +8%
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA 2,670 $95,520 +16%
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL 2,620 $80,880 -2%

Best paid

San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA 1,060 $149,680 +82%
Vallejo, CA 190 $136,200 +66%
Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA 70 $134,880 +64%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $82,280. 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 78. 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.