Will Artificial Intelligence Replace Medical Laboratory Workers?

When I train new Medical Laboratory Scientists, I tell them if they want to have job security, they need to be better at their jobs than AI. This will become more and more difficult as the technology accelerates. But what does it mean for the long-term viability of careers in healthcare in general and laboratory work in particular?

Skynet: Is the lab looking at a Terminator scenario when it comes to jobs?

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as a powerful tool in healthcare, including in medical laboratory settings. Its rapid development has sparked discussions around its impact on the workforce, particularly whether it poses a danger to replacing jobs in medical laboratories. While AI presents both opportunities and challenges, the notion that it will outright replace human workers in this field is more nuanced than it may first appear. The devil is in the details.

Can AI be good for the lab?

AI has demonstrated its capacity to enhance efficiency in medical laboratories by automating repetitive and time-consuming tasks. For example, AI algorithms can rapidly analyze large volumes of diagnostic data, interpret laboratory test results, and flag abnormal findings for review. In this way, AI holds the promise of improving patient care by reducing human error and significantly speeding up turnaround times, especially in high-volume settings. Additionally, AI-driven systems can manage inventory, monitor instrument performance, and optimize workflow logistics, thereby improving overall operational efficiency.

Despite these capabilities, AI is not poised to completely replace medical laboratory professionals. Instead, it is more likely to transform the nature of their work. AI systems still require oversight and validation by trained experts to ensure accuracy and reliability. Many laboratory tasks—such as specimen collection, complex problem-solving, quality control, and compliance with regulatory standards—necessitate human judgment and expertise. Moreover, laboratory professionals play a critical role in interpreting test results in clinical context, communicating findings with physicians, and ensuring ethical considerations are upheld, especially when dealing with sensitive patient information.

Is there are future for humans in the lab?

The successful implementation of AI in medical laboratories depends heavily on collaboration between technology developers and laboratory personnel. As AI becomes more integrated into laboratory operations, it will generate a demand for professionals with hybrid skill sets that combine clinical laboratory knowledge with data science and informatics and soft skills such as ability to communicate. This shift underscores the need for upskilling rather than job displacement. If your laboratory job is repetitive and computer based, you are likely to be out of a job in the next ten years. If your job requires patient interaction or complex tasks in the laboratory, you are likely safe.

Are we Joaquin into a HER scenario?

Let's have a look at tasks that are more or less likely to be replaced:

Will likely be replaced:

Slide Analysis

AI can efficiently analyze digital images of blood smears, tissue sections, and other specimens, identifying cell types, counting cells, and detecting abnormalities.

Routine Data Entry

AI systems can automate the input of patient and specimen information into laboratory information systems, reducing human error.

Result Flagging and Triage

AI algorithms can rapidly scan test results and flag abnormal or critical values for immediate attention, prioritizing urgent cases.

Basic Quality Control Monitoring

Continuous AI-based monitoring of quality control trends can identify shifts or drifts in instrumentation performance before they trigger manual alerts.

Microbial Identification from Culture Plates

Image recognition AI can identify colony morphology and suggest possible organisms before confirmatory testing.

Unlikely to be replaced:

Troubleshooting Complex Instrumentation Issues

When analyzers or instruments malfunction beyond basic error codes, experienced professionals are needed to identify and resolve the problems.

Validation of New Tests and Methods

Developing and validating new assays or adapting existing ones to meet specific regulatory and clinical needs requires human oversight and decision-making.

Specimen Collection and Special Handling

Phlebotomy is a very human-centric skill and is unlikely to be replaced by robots. It is also low on the priority list for replacement because phlebotomists are paid below other laboratory professionals.

Training and Mentorship

Human professionals play an essential role in educating students and new technologists through hands-on experience and mentorship.

Interdisciplinary Communication

Discussing unusual or critical results with clinicians, pathologists, or other healthcare providers requires nuanced communication skills.

You think that's a CBC you're running?

What does this all mean for Laboratory Professionals?

As with many industries, the jobs that will suffer are the jobs somewhere in the middle, between entry level labor jobs that are very manual and high level managerial-type jobs. The squeeze will happen to mid-level bench workers. As AI gets paired with robotics and automation, the effect will be felt by run-of-the-mill techs. What we have already seen is a push toward eliminating decent-paying tech positions in favor of teams of assistants monitored by a single high-level tech.

Does this mean I shouldn't go into the field of Laboratory Medical Science now?

While nobody can predict the future, jobs in the laboratory (and healthcare in general) are more likely to remain in existence over the medium- and long-term. The US Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates the projected percent change in employment for Medical Laboratory Technologists and Technicians from 2023 to 2033 to be 5%. The average growth rate for all occupations is 4%. So, it is about in-line with, or slightly higher, than the average across all professions.

What we have seen in practice is that hospitals will do what is best for their bottom line: hiring those with less experience who may not have lab backgrounds because they can pay them less that knowledgeable, experienced employees. And when AI comes fully online in the laboratory, even they might be replaced.

But the question remains, can you be more useful than AI? Work on skills that AI can't replace. Be able to handle complex situations that involve both humans and other complex. Be communicative and helpful. And just be good at your job. Every incompetent tech strengthens the case to be replaced by AI.