Why Epic Changes the Evaluation
Epic environments have their own documentation grammar: note types tied to encounter context, SmartPhrases and SmartText that providers have refined over years, and downstream dependencies in coding and quality reporting. An AI scribe that produces good prose but ignores that grammar creates a second problem — a clinician now reformatting a well-written note into the structure their chart expects. Template fidelity is therefore the first evaluation criterion, ahead of raw writing quality.
The Four Questions That Matter
1. Does the note arrive in our note types and sections? Generic SOAP output is not the same as a note structured to your build. 2. Are per-provider preferences preserved? Groups fail rollouts when one clinician's format is imposed on everyone. 3. How does documentation reach the chart? Portal download and direct entry are both valid; vague answers are not. 4. What is the turnaround? Anything measured in hours changes the workflow far less than anything measured in minutes.
Compliance Questions to Ask in Writing
Any vendor handling PHI is a business associate. Ask for the BAA before any data moves, encryption specifics for transit and at rest, access controls, and audit logging. A compliant vendor answers all four in writing without hesitation. Our HIPAA compliance details document each of these.
Where Sunrise Fits
Our AI scribe for Epic generates a complete note in about two minutes, structured to your note types and sections, with per-provider templates configured during onboarding at no charge. Delivery is via your secure portal or direct entry into the chart using role-restricted, audited access.
Run the Evaluation on Real Visits
Specification comparisons plateau quickly. The decisive test is a parallel trial: run the candidate on your own encounters for a week and compare the finished notes against what your clinicians would have written. Ours is free to trial, and setup takes days rather than months.