AI Can’t Improve Healthcare if Clinicians and Staff Aren’t Trained to Use, Orchestrate It

Why It Matters

Without a skilled workforce, AI investments can degrade care quality and waste resources; robust training converts AI from a novelty into a reliable clinical partner.

Key Takeaways

• AI adoption outpaces staff readiness in healthcare
• One‑time training leads to automation bias or disuse
• Role‑specific, continuous learning builds AI orchestration skills
• Clinicians must interpret, question, and override AI outputs
• Leadership must monitor and adjust AI workflows continuously

Pulse Analysis

Healthcare executives are betting heavily on artificial intelligence to streamline everything from diagnostic imaging to revenue cycle management. Yet the speed of AI rollout far exceeds the development of a competent workforce, creating a mismatch that mirrors buying a high‑performance sports car without a driver’s license. Studies from the AMA and World Economic Forum highlight that two‑thirds of physicians now use augmented intelligence, but systematic training programs remain rare, leaving clinicians vulnerable to over‑reliance or outright rejection of AI tools.

The emerging concept of the "AI orchestrator" reframes training from mere button‑pressing to critical judgment. Clinicians, nurses, and administrative staff must learn to read confidence scores, recognize algorithmic limitations, and intervene when outputs conflict with clinical context. Role‑specific simulations—such as a nurse evaluating a sepsis alert or a coder reviewing AI‑generated billing suggestions—build the mental models needed to balance machine insight with human expertise. This continuous learning loop reduces automation bias, prevents algorithmic disuse, and cultivates a culture where AI is a collaborative partner rather than a black‑box authority.

Strategic leaders can turn these insights into measurable value by embedding AI readiness into governance frameworks. Establishing clear usage policies, monitoring adoption metrics, and iterating training curricula keep the technology aligned with evolving clinical pathways. When organizations treat AI as a core capability rather than a one‑off purchase, they see higher diagnostic accuracy, faster documentation, and improved staff satisfaction—all of which translate into stronger financial performance and competitive advantage in a data‑driven healthcare market.

AI Can’t Improve Healthcare if Clinicians and Staff Aren’t Trained to Use, Orchestrate It

Matt Scavetta · February 2026

Healthcare systems are racing to roll out AI for diagnosing, documentation, scheduling, coding, and patient communication, but without workforce training, they’re speeding toward new risks.

Leaders often assume AI technology will drive improvements by itself, but unprepared clinicians and non‑clinical staff can easily misuse, mistrust, over‑rely on, or outright abandon these tools.

This is the difference between buying a Ferrari and confidently knowing how to handle it safely at high speeds. Giving healthcare teams powerful AI tools without training undermines their ability to use potentially system‑changing tools safely and effectively.

AI readiness goes beyond one‑time adoption

According to the American Medical Association, two‑thirds of physicians now use augmented intelligence, yet healthcare still lags behind other industries in AI adoption. A major reason is a gap between technology and strategic plans, workforce readiness, and rising distrust in AI, reports the World Economic Forum.

In many healthcare systems, clinicians and non‑clinical staff aren’t prepared to safely and consistently use AI. That’s because AI training is often treated as a one‑time requirement or a simple box to be checked, instead of an ongoing investment. Closing this gap requires role‑specific learning that builds confidence and judgment over time, not just at adoption.

Healthcare AI’s success demands new workforce skills

AI readiness isn’t just about technical skills. Healthcare teams need a new way of thinking that matches how AI actually works. With AI integrated into tools, it gives best‑guess predictions and suggestions based on statistical likelihoods and confidence scores, not certainties. So, instead of “if this, then that,” thinking, it shifts to “if this, then this is the most likely answer.”

The goal of training then shouldn’t be limited to teaching clinicians and non‑clinical staff how to use AI tools, but rather how to be AI orchestrators who can:

• Interpret outputs

• Question results

• Recognize limitations

• Override machine suggestions

When AI tools are deployed without this understanding, predictable failures can emerge.

Clinicians may over‑rely on AI in areas like decision support, triage, and documentation. Or when not fully understanding how suggestions were generated, they may apply outputs inconsistently, resulting in diagnosis, documentation, and delivery of care breakdowns.

Without the right training, systems can experience “automation bias,” where staff stop thinking critically because AI is usually right, or “algorithmic disuse,” where they stop using AI after it makes one mistake. The good news? Both are preventable with better training and guidance.

Role‑specific training that matches workforce responsibilities

Across roles, the best training puts people in real‑world scenarios and sets clear guidance on use. The goal here isn’t just building familiarity with AI, but also confidence in judgment, so staff and clinicians understand what AI is meant to do, and just as importantly, what it isn’t.

That’s how AI earns its place as a trusted collaborator. And it starts here:

• Leverage AI as a support, not a substitute, for clinical judgment – Clinicians need to know how to provide accurate inputs, maintain oversight, and interpret suggestions in a clinical context. They should also be able to recognize AI’s limitations and biases, understanding when their judgement bests an AI suggestion. So, if a nurse understands why an AI system flagged a patient for sepsis risk, they can validate the threat based on their assessment rather than blindly following an AI‑recommended care pathway.

• Position administrative teams as AI contributors, not passive users – AI training should help administrative teams understand when AI‑generated outputs can be trusted and how to identify and manage cases that AI and automation can’t resolve. Training should also elevate the importance of their non‑clinical roles. Every note entered in an EHR is training and informing AI; it’s a vital contribution to care quality and system intelligence.

• Establish AI as a core capability, not just a one‑time rollout – For operational and clinical leaders, AI training is less about operating tools and more about being a steward of the technology. Leaders must be equipped to set clear expectations for appropriate AI use, and actively monitor adoption and use patterns. When performance, trust, or reliability issues inevitably arise with AI, these leaders also need the confidence, skills, and authority to respond quickly to adjust workflows, training, and guidance as needed.

AI’s promise to improve healthcare systems won’t be realized simply by buying more advanced tools. It hinges on continuous investments in training that ensure clinicians, staff, and leaders can confidently question outputs, apply judgement, and manage risks. Leaders that invest intentionally in workforce readiness will turn AI from a shiny purchase into a powerful, productive tool.

Photo: LeoWolfert, Getty Images

---

Matt Scavetta

Matt Scavetta is the Chief Technology and Innovation Officer at Future Tech, a global IT solutions provider that offers a diverse array of technology services to both corporate and government sectors.

This post appears through the MedCity Influencers program. Anyone can publish their perspective on business and innovation in healthcare on MedCity News through MedCity Influencers. Click here to find out how.