UK dataswitch to US
Podiatrists
advising patients with diabetes on foot and nail care to prevent complications, coordinating patient care with GPs and establishing and maintaining a safe practice environment. If that's your week, this page is about your job.
The honest answer
AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: administering local anaesthetic to patients to perform foot and ankle procedures is work software can't reach.
What shifts is maintaining accurate records. This page scores what today's tools actually do, not headlines.
Your week, as this page understands it
Podiatrists (formerly known as chiropodists) diagnose and treat ailments and abnormalities of the human foot and lower limb, deal with minor infections, injuries and deformities, and conditions resulting from other major health disorders such as diabetes. The job title says “podiatrists”. The real job is the part underneath: administering local anaesthetic to patients to perform foot and ankle procedures. That is the thing someone has to be right about.
The exposed part of this job is specific, and we won’t pretend it is coming back. But podiatrists is not one task. It is 35 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is administering local anaesthetic to patients to perform foot and ankle procedures, and the ledger below shows exactly why.
Where the work sits, by task weight
- shifting to AI
- 5%
- changing shape
- 6%
- staying human
- 89%
These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.
Whole-job exposure score 20 out of 100 (15–26 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, across 35 scored tasks. The number is the support for the sentence above it, not a headline about anyone’s future.
How we know this
What is measured: Every published task statement for podiatrists is rated on five dimensions: can a model produce the output, does the work need a body in a room, does it need a legally accountable person, does it depend on a person being trusted in the moment, and how much data exists. A published formula turns those five ratings into the score; the model never writes the number.
How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.
Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-04. Read the full method.
Your job, task by task
These are the official task statements for this occupation, in plain English, sorted by what the evidence says is happening to each one. The official wording sits under every line so you can check the rewrite against it.
- 3 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
- Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.
Shifting to AI
2 tasksTasks today’s tools can already do most of. This is the part we will not soften: where these rows are the bulk of your week, the week changes.
Maintaining accurate records
This is reading one thing and writing another: accurate records in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 80 · 2256/00Source: “Maintain accurate records.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (62–70 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Clinic record-keeping is exactly the sort of writing-up that software already does to a usable standard.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Ordering medical equipment to support diagnostic services
This is reading one thing and writing another: medical equipment in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 60 · 2256/00Source: “Order medical equipment to support diagnostic services.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Ordering equipment is purchasing paperwork that software handles well from the department's usual list.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Changing shape
2 tasksTasks where the machine takes the producing and a person keeps the checking, the deciding, or the answering-for-it. For most jobs this is the biggest group, and it is where "transformation, not termination" is literally visible.
Assessing treatment options to manage foot and lower limb conditions
The software now makes the first pass at treatment options, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 85 · 2256/00Source: “Assess treatment options to manage foot and lower limb conditions.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 48 out of 100 (41–55 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Weighing up treatment options against published guidance is largely desk-based reasoning that software handles well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Evaluating and reflecting on the effectiveness of own practice for self-development
The software now makes the first pass at the effectiveness of own practice, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 75 · 2256/00Source: “Evaluate and reflect on the effectiveness of own practice for self-development.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 44 out of 100 (37–51 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: A tool can shape a reflective write-up, but the practice being reflected on is the podiatrist's own and feeds their registration.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Staying human
31 tasksTasks that stay with a person, because they happen in the physical world, because the rules need someone accountable, or because the value is that a specific person does them.
Advising patients with diabetes on foot and nail care to prevent complications
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for patients, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 90 · 2256/00Source: “Advise patients with diabetes on foot and nail care to prevent complications.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 30 out of 100 (23–37 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Diabetic foot care advice is highly standardised, though getting someone to follow it depends on the podiatrist they trust.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Assessing patients' feet and lower legs for medical conditions
This work happens in the physical world: patients' feet, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 90 · 2256/00Source: “Assess patients' feet and lower legs for medical conditions.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (0–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Examining feet and lower legs means touching, testing and looking in person, and clinics expect a registered podiatrist to do it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Practising within the profession's legal and ethical boundaries
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for within the profession's legal, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 85 · 2256/00Source: “Practise within the profession's legal and ethical boundaries.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 16 out of 100 (9–23 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Practising inside the profession's legal and ethical limits is only possible for a person on the register.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Diagnosing diseases of the foot using medical histories
This work happens in the physical world: diseases of the foot, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 2256/00Source: “Diagnose diseases of the foot using medical histories, physical examinations, X-rays, and laboratory test results.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 15 out of 100 (8–22 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Test results can be interpreted by software, but the examination and the diagnosis itself rest with a registered podiatrist.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Administering local anaesthetic to patients to perform foot and ankle procedures
This work happens in the physical world: local anaesthetic, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 2256/00Source: “Administer local anaesthetic to patients to perform foot and ankle procedures.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Injecting local anaesthetic into a foot is a physical procedure only a qualified clinician may perform.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Applying and changing dressings on foot wounds
This work happens in the physical world: dressings, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 2256/00Source: “Apply and change dressings on foot wounds.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Cleaning and dressing a foot wound is hands-on work done at the patient's side.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Show the other 25 tasks
Communicating accurately, ensuring compliance with data protection legislation and maintaining security, professionalism and courtesy
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles accurately, ensuring compliance and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 80 · 2256/00Source: “Communicate accurately, ensuring compliance with data protection legislation and maintaining security, professionalism, and courtesy.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 39 out of 100 (32–46 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Clear, data-protection-compliant communication is well documented and easy to draft, though much of it is said to patients directly.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Recruiting new employees to support podiatric care
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles new employees and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 50 · 2256/00Source: “Recruit new employees to support podiatric care.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 39 out of 100 (32–46 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Adverts, shortlisting and scheduling are largely automated now, though interviews still turn on meeting people.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Referring patients to doctors for systemic disorders like arthritis or diabetes observed in limbs
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for patients, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 80 · 2256/00Source: “Refer patients to doctors for systemic disorders like arthritis or diabetes observed in limbs.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 36 out of 100 (29–43 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Writing a referral is straightforward for software, though spotting the signs and standing behind the referral is the podiatrist's call.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Prescribing medications for foot-related conditions
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for medications, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 75 · 2256/00Source: “Prescribe medications for foot-related conditions.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 32 out of 100 (28–36 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Choosing the right medicine is well documented, but only a qualified prescriber may lawfully write the prescription.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 4/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Supporting health promotion and disease prevention activities
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles health promotion and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 75 · 2256/00Source: “Support health promotion and disease prevention activities.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 30 out of 100 (23–37 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Health promotion materials are easy to produce, but the persuading happens between people.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Recommending physiotherapy treatments for patient recovery
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for physiotherapy treatments, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 65 · 2256/00Source: “Recommend physiotherapy treatments for patient recovery.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 30 out of 100 (23–37 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Physiotherapy referrals follow well-known patterns, but the recommendation carries a clinician’s professional responsibility.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Recommending assistive devices based on patients' needs or impairments
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for assistive devices, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 70 · 2256/00Source: “Recommend assistive devices based on patients' needs or impairments.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 27 out of 100 (20–34 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Matching devices to needs is well documented, but the assessment behind the recommendation happens with the patient in the room.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Coordinating patient care with GPs
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for patient care, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 80 · 2256/00Source: “Coordinate patient care with GPs, physiotherapists, and other health professionals.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 23 out of 100 (16–30 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Referral letters and summaries draft easily, but agreeing shared care with GPs and physiotherapists needs a clinician in the conversation.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Suggesting surgical interventions when necessary for patient care
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for surgical interventions, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 70 · 2256/00Source: “Suggest surgical interventions when necessary for patient care.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 23 out of 100 (16–30 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Surgical options are set out in guidelines, but deciding one fits this patient, and saying so, falls to the registered podiatrist.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Establishing and maintaining a safe practice environment
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: a safe practice environment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 2256/00Source: “Establish and maintain a safe practice environment, maintaining confidentiality and records appropriately.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Records and confidentiality are largely handled by systems, but infection control and a safe clinic need someone physically there.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Looking after own health and wellbeing
staying humanThe ratings behind this row put after own health well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 70 · 2256/00Source: “Look after own health and wellbeing, seeking appropriate support where necessary.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the five ratings behind the score, with no single dominant reason.
The rating behind it: Looking after your own health is personal action rather than something that can be produced for you.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Conducting speaking engagements to inform the public on the benefits of foot care
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: engagements, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 2256/00Source: “Conduct speaking engagements to inform the public on the benefits of foot care.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 20 out of 100 (13–27 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: The talk itself writes easily, but standing in front of an audience and holding their attention does not.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Collaborating within a multidisciplinary team to achieve common goals
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles within a multidisciplinary team and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 70 · 2256/00Source: “Collaborate within a multidisciplinary team to achieve common goals.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 17 out of 100 (10–24 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Team working runs on live conversations and relationships built between colleagues over time.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Designing and implementing exercise therapy programmes for patients
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: exercise therapy programmes, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 65 · 2256/00Source: “Design and implement exercise therapy programmes for patients.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 15 out of 100 (8–22 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Exercise programmes are easy to generate, but tailoring and teaching them happens in person with the patient.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Exercising professional judgement as an autonomous professional
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for professional judgement, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 80 · 2256/00Source: “Exercise professional judgement as an autonomous professional.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 13 out of 100 (6–20 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Carrying the clinical decision as an accountable registered professional is what registration means, and no tool can hold it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Practising inclusively, recognising the impact of culture, equality and diversity
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for inclusively, recognising the impact of culture, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 80 · 2256/00Source: “Practise inclusively, recognising the impact of culture, equality, and diversity.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 13 out of 100 (6–20 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Written guidance on inclusive practice exists, but reading and responding to a particular patient happens live in the clinic.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Diagnosing performance-related foot and ankle conditions to enhance athletic performance
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: performance-related foot, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 2256/00Source: “Diagnose performance-related foot and ankle conditions to enhance athletic performance.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 13 out of 100 (6–20 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Assessing how someone’s feet perform in sport depends on watching them move, and the conclusion is a clinician’s.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Delivering prosthetic devices and other assistive technology
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: prosthetic devices, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 2256/00Source: “Deliver prosthetic devices and other assistive technology.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (0–14 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Handing over a device and checking it works for the patient means being physically present.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Supervising podiatry assistants
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: podiatry assistants, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 60 · 2256/00Source: “Supervise podiatry assistants.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (0–14 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Supervising assistants means being on hand while clinical work happens and answering for it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Treating disorders affecting the feet and ankles
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: disorders affecting the feet, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 85 · 2256/00Source: “Treat disorders affecting the feet and ankles.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Treating feet and ankles is physical work carried out on the patient in the clinic.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Surgicallying treat conditions, corns, calluses, ingrown nails, tumours, shortened tendons, bunions, cysts or abscesses
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: treat conditions, corns, calluses, ingrown nails, tumours, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 80 · 2256/00Source: “Surgically treat conditions such as corns, calluses, ingrown nails, tumours, shortened tendons, bunions, cysts, or abscesses.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Cutting out an ingrown nail or removing a cyst is surgery done with instruments on the patient.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Conducting surgical procedures on feet to correct deformities or treating conditions
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: surgical procedures, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 75 · 2256/00Source: “Conduct surgical procedures on feet to correct deformities or treat conditions.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Foot surgery is a physical procedure carried out by a qualified clinician.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Correcting deformities using plaster casts and strapping
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: deformities, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 2256/00Source: “Correct deformities using plaster casts and strapping.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Applying plaster casts and strapping is hands-on treatment on the patient.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Fitting or adjusting prosthetic or orthotic devices
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: prosthetic, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 2256/00Source: “Fit or adjust prosthetic or orthotic devices.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Fitting and adjusting a device on someone's foot is hands-on work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Treating deformities using mechanical methods like whirlpool or paraffin baths
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: deformities, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 70 · 2256/00Source: “Treat deformities using mechanical methods like whirlpool or paraffin baths.” (UK task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Whirlpool and wax bath treatments are physically delivered to the patient.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
What this job pays, and how many people do it
- Median pay
- £47,700a year, before tax, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.ashe-t14, 2025 · ASHE 2025 provisional (reference April 2025)Provisional, because the ONS revises this figure in the autumn.
How we know this
Source: ashe-t14
Reference period: ASHE 2025 provisional (reference April 2025)
Rounding: Shown to the nearest £100. The exact published figure is in the downloadable dataset. We do not render pounds the survey cannot support.
- People doing this job
- 16,200in the UK, 2026.nomis-aps · Apr 2025-Mar 2026 (latest APS 12-month period)This headcount comes from a survey, not a census, so treat it as a good estimate rather than an exact count.
What is deliberately not here: a forecast of how many of these jobs exist in ten years. Where an official projection exists for a market we publish it with its vintage; where it does not, we leave the space empty rather than borrow the other country’s number.
Why this is shifting
The reason is boringly specific. Most of what is shifting here is reading one thing and writing another: accurate records in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: maintaining accurate records and ordering medical equipment to support diagnostic services. What it cannot do is be answerable: local anaesthetic needs a named person the rules will accept, and software cannot be that person. Which is why this page talks about your tasks changing, not your job ending.
Your move
Over a pint: what I’d tell you if you were my friend
Start with what does not change: administering local anaesthetic to patients to perform foot and ankle procedures is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.
So, given all that: 5% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 6% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 89% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 35 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.
So the thing worth your attention is not the job going away. It is the layer around it. Maintaining accurate records is the part turning into software, and being the person who understands that layer is worth money.
This week: one thing
Ask the one question. Find whoever is bringing new software into your workplace (the manager, the office, whoever runs the system) and ask them what it is meant to do to accurate records, and what it is not meant to touch. Ten minutes, this week, before anyone decides it for you.
- What you end up holding
- a straight answer about what is actually being rolled out, and when
- How long it takes
- ten minutes
If there’s nobody obvious to ask, or you’d rather not ask your manager: Put the same question to your union rep, your shift lead or the person who has been there longest, in person, over a break. Same ten minutes, same answer, and you will usually get a straighter one. Write down what they say. The note is the artifact, and it tells you whether local anaesthetic is in scope or not. Nothing to log into, no licence needed.
Over the next 90 days
Get inside the tool rollout rather than waiting for it. Over the next ninety days, ask to be in the group that tests, checks or signs off whatever new system arrives near assessing treatment options to manage foot and lower limb conditions. It is usually an unglamorous seat that nobody fights for, and it is the one that decides how the software is used on your job rather than to it.
Over the next 12 months
On this evidence I would not retrain out of this job, and I will say that plainly rather than hedge it. The task list here is dominated by work that stays with a person. What I would do with a year is get formally recognised for the layer around it (the systems, the compliance, the planning), so you are the one who understands the software instead of the one it is done to. Before you pay for anything, spend an hour with National Careers Service. It is free and government-funded, and it is listed below with the rest of the free routes.
The roads out of here, and why I am not sending you down them
I looked at the obvious moves out of this job, and here is what I found.
I checked the 12 nearest UK occupations to podiatrists (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was health associate professionals n.e.c.: only about 16% of its durable work is work you already do and it pays 35.9% less. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 20/100 here, with only 5% of the task list in the top band, and “advise patients with diabetes on foot and nail care to prevent complications” is not work that hands over cleanly. None of them beats deepening what you already have.
How that was checked: this job was compared against all 412 UK occupations in this release on their official task statements, and the 12 nearest were examined one by one. A move that turns on an industry, an employer or a qualification rather than on the work itself will not show up in a check like that. And this release carries no licence register, so anything you are weighing needs that looked up separately.
3 moves I checked and rejected
These are the obvious-looking jumps. They are here with their reasons rather than quietly dropped, because the ones that fail are worth knowing about. It is one less thing to turn over at night.
Health associate professionals n.e.c.
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “treat disorders affecting the feet and ankles”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 16% of the work in that job the software is not taking.
Why I am not recommending it: You would be starting most of it from nothing: about 16% of the durable work in that job is work you do today, and the rest you would be learning while the bills carried on. It is a pay cut, in those words: £30,575 against your £47,699, 35.9% less (ASHE Table 14.7a, 2025 provisional (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Physiotherapists
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “fit or adjust prosthetic or orthotic devices”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 13% of the work in that job the software is not taking.
Why I am not recommending it: You would be starting most of it from nothing: about 13% of the durable work in that job is work you do today, and the rest you would be learning while the bills carried on.
Paramedics
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour because one of your tasks is on their list in the same words: “coordinate patient care with GPs, physiotherapists, and other health professionals”. Across the whole of both lists that adds up to about 9% of the work in that job the software is not taking.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 9% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
What I’d stop worrying about
A friend tells you what not to spend fear on. This is that list.
The headline number you read somewhere
The big “X% of jobs” figures are about the whole economy, not about you. The number that describes your job is on this page: 5% of its task weight, across 35 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.
The headlines about your trade disappearing
They are usually about the technology, not the timetable. Changes to work like administering local anaesthetic to patients to perform foot and ankle procedures arrive through rules, insurance and money, slowly and visibly. This page tracks the task evidence and will move when it moves.
Retraining out of a job that is holding up
On this evidence I would not spend money leaving. Spend it on the layer around the job instead: the tools, the paperwork, the planning. That is where the change actually is.
The “obvious” next job everyone suggests
I checked the obvious moves and most of them did not survive. The reasons are printed with the routes above, including the pay and the gate. A move that fails on the numbers is worth knowing about so you can stop turning it over at night.
You are reading the United Kingdom figures
The United States splits this work across more than one official group, of which Chiropractors is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.
Switch to the United States page →partial match
The other groups this work is counted across:
In US official statistics this job is counted as Chiropractors, Podiatrists, Occupational Therapists, Recreational Therapists, Therapists, All Other, Acupuncturists, Healthcare Diagnosing or Treating Practitioners, All Other and Genetic Counselors. Pay is shown separately for each of those groups (medians cannot be averaged together), while the task list and the scores on this page are for this group only.
Your route through this
Where to go next, and what it costs
Free, and complete
The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.
In England:
A free hour with a government-funded careers adviser is worth more than another evening of reading. In England that's the National Careers Service.
Free, government-funded
In England:
National Careers Service - Find a course
Search what's actually running near you before you spend anything.
Free to search; individual courses vary
In England:
Free courses for jobs (Level 3 qualifications)
A free Level 3 qualification you already qualify for beats a paid course you don't need.
Free for eligible adults
In England:
Free, up to 16 weeks, and you get a job interview at the end. In England these are Skills Bootcamps - search what's running near you.
Free for eligible adults in England
In Scotland:
My World of Work (Skills Development Scotland)
In Scotland it's My World of Work, from Skills Development Scotland.
Free, publicly funded
In Wales:
In Wales it's Careers Wales.
Free, Welsh Government-funded
In Northern Ireland:
Careers Service Northern Ireland
In Northern Ireland it's the Careers Service on nidirect.
Free, Department for the Economy-funded
No Space for this job, but one for what is happening to it
Nothing Collab365 runs is built for podiatrists, and we are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.
There is one that is not about a job title at all. The AI Authority is about being the person who directs these tools at work rather than the person they get compared to. That is worth saying here, because 5% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.
7 days free, no card needed. Explore up to 2 Spaces before you choose a plan: you pick a plan later, not now.
The AI Authority is a general community about working with AI, not a course for podiatrists. You do not need it to act on anything here: the moves above cost nothing and stand on their own. The data on this page is the same either way.
Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for podiatrists launches. Nothing else.
That did not look like an email address, so nothing was saved. Have another go below.
We could not save that. The fault is ours, not yours, and your address was not stored. Please try again later.
No deadline on any of this. The page will still be here, and the data is refreshed on a published schedule rather than when someone wants a headline.
Questions people ask about this job
- Will AI replace Podiatrists?
- Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 35 official task statements scored for Podiatrists (United Kingdom, SOC 2256), 5% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 20 out of 100 (range 15–26, band: low). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.
- Which tasks in “Podiatrists” can AI already do?
- The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Order medical equipment to support diagnostic services” (75/100, high); “Maintain accurate records” (66/100, high); “Assess treatment options to manage foot and lower limb conditions” (48/100, partial). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.
- Which tasks in “Podiatrists” stay human?
- About 89% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Treat deformities using mechanical methods like whirlpool or paraffin baths” (0/100, minimal); “Fit or adjust prosthetic or orthotic devices” (0/100, minimal); “Correct deformities using plaster casts and strapping” (0/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.
- What should someone working in “Podiatrists” do about AI?
- Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 5% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 89% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.
- How is the AI exposure score for Podiatrists calculated?
- Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 35 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.
Where these numbers come from
About the data on this page
- Provisional, because the ONS revises this figure in the autumn.
- This headcount comes from a survey, not a census, so treat it as a good estimate rather than an exact count.
- The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
- 3 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
- Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.
- Task statements
- gaisi-indexProcessing: catalogue-bridge → ssc-relatedness-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
- Task weights
- gaisi-index (relatedness)
- Scores
- Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-05.
- Pay and employment
- ashe-t14 (ASHE 2025 provisional (reference April 2025))nomis-aps (Apr 2025-Mar 2026 (latest APS 12-month period))
Figures on this page come from release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Every release keeps its own permanent address, so a figure you cite in March is still there, unchanged, in November.
The plain-English wording on this page is assembled directly from the task statements and the published ratings, not written by hand for this occupation. That is why it is specific, and it is also why we say so.
The routes and free resources further up are today’s, not the release’s (last reviewed 2026-08-05). A route is an offer, not a historical fact, so it moves on its own clock.
Using these figures?
Cite this
Everything on this site is published under CC BY 4.0. Quote it, chart it, sell something built on it. Just say where it came from, and cite the dated release rather than the site, so the figure you quote stays checkable.
Plain text
Collab365 (2026). Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1 (methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0). https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1. Licensed CC BY 4.0. Built with O*NET data (USDOL/ETA, CC BY 4.0); ONS data (Open Government Licence v3.0); GAISI task framework (arXiv:2507.22748, MIT); BLS data (public domain).
BibTeX
@misc{collab365futureproof2026q41,
title = {Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1},
author = {{Collab365}},
year = {2026},
url = {https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1},
note = {Release 2026-q4.1, methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0, CC BY 4.0}
}Data as of release 2026-q4.1, published . Releases never change after publication; when the figures move, a new dated release is published beside this one and this one stays exactly where it is.