AI and Occupational Therapy: Hearing Clinician Concerns and Reframing the Future

Artificial intelligence is shaping nearly every corner of healthcare. From documentation tools to predictive analytics to digital training platforms, AI is moving fast, and clinicians are feeling the shift every day. For many occupational therapists, this change brings curiosity and excitement, but also a growing sense of uncertainty.

OTs are asking important questions about job security, professional identity, data transparency, and whether technology may one day compete with the human elements of therapy that cannot be automated. **These concerns are not overreactions.** They come from years of working in environments where new tools sometimes created more work, not less, and where clinical judgment has been undervalued in favour of efficiency.

Why OTs Feel Cautious About AI

There are clear themes that come up again and again when OTs talk about AI and technology.

1. Job security and professional identity

A growing number of reviews note that OTs often feel conflicted about AI because it sits at the intersection of innovation and professional integrity. Therapists want tools that extend their abilities, not overshadow them. A 2025 scoping review found that while AI is slowly entering OT practice, clinicians remain unsure about how it might shift roles or responsibilities over time_1.

It showed that most AI tools in OT are still early stage and focus on tasks like assessment support, monitoring, and data interpretation. In other words, they complement therapeutic reasoning rather than compete with it. This reinforces the idea that AI works best when it supports a therapist’s insight, not when it tries to automate it.

2. Data privacy and trust

Healthcare is highly sensitive, and clinicians want clarity around how client information is collected, stored, and used. The digital health landscape can feel opaque, and a lack of transparency fuels skepticism. Reviews consistently identify data privacy as one of the major barriers to adopting AI in rehabilitation settings_2.

The authors emphasize that responsible AI depends on clear and accessible communication about data practices. This echoes what many OTs tell us: trust and transparency matter more than technical features. When clinicians understand how information is handled, they feel more confident engaging with new tools.

3. The fear of losing autonomy

OTs rely on clinical reasoning, contextual understanding, and relationship building. The idea of an algorithm taking clinical decisions out of their hands feels incompatible with the values of the profession. Research shows that AI tools are most effective when they enhance, not replace, the therapist’s decision making_3.

This review highlights that AI can expand therapist visibility beyond the session and support remote assessment, but only when used as an adjunct to clinical judgment. The technology provides structure and patterns, while the therapist remains responsible for interpretation. This aligns with the broader message that AI should never override clinical autonomy.

These concerns are not barriers to innovation. They are reminders that technology must respect, preserve, and elevate the therapeutic relationship.

What the research says about AI in rehabilitation

Broad findings across digital rehabilitation and healthcare suggest that AI-supported tools can:

• Reduce administrative load
• Help monitor client progress between sessions
• Increase access in regions with long waitlists
• Provide structured cognitive or motor practice
• Improve consistency of at-home training

But the research also highlights something essential. Outcomes are strongest when clinicians remain in control of the therapeutic process. AI can assist, inform, and support, but the clinician’s interpretation and judgment are irreplaceable.

AI performs best as an enhancer of human expertise, not a substitute.

How we think about this at Neurofit

Neurofit was not created to replace the clinician. It was created to extend them.

Neurofit’s founder, Alex, often puts it this way:

“AI should give clinicians superpowers. It should never replace the expertise that only humans bring to care.”

This reflects a broader philosophy rather than a claim about specific features. It means that any technology used in clinical care, whether AI-driven or not, has a responsibility to centre the therapist.

• The clinician sets the goals.
• The clinician interprets the data.
• The clinician adapts the plan.
• Technology simply supports the process.

Tools should simplify therapy planning, offer structured activities, and make progress visible without ever replacing clinical reasoning.

The way forward: clinician led, technology supported

The future of occupational therapy is not a choice between humans and AI. It is a partnership where clinicians stay central and technology plays a supportive role.

This future looks like:

• Therapists with more time for rapport and reasoning
• Clients practicing consistently between sessions
• Tools that reduce administrative burden
• Hybrid models where digital practice strengthens in-person work
• Technology that respects the therapist’s expertise rather than competing with it

If you want to learn more about how Neurofit fits into modern cognitive care, explore our other blog posts that dive deeper into clinical value, workflow support, and the evolving landscape of digital rehabilitation

‍