Epic vs. Medaptus for Infusion Coding Automation: Pros and Cons

Summary: Infusion and injection billing is one of the most error-prone and labor-intensive areas of the revenue cycle. Epic, while powerful as an EHR, often struggles with the complex logic required for accurate infusion charge capture. Medaptus, on the other hand, is built to automate this process, reducing errors, saving coder and clinician time, and maximizing revenue capture. This blog breaks down the differences between the two platforms—covering charge logic, coder workload, IT effort, compliance risk, and cost—to help Revenue Cycle Leaders decide which approach best protects both compliance and revenue. 

Infusion and injection services represent some of the most complex coding and billing scenarios in healthcare: infusion hierarchies, overlapping administrations, IV pushes versus IV infusions, and missing stop times, to name a few complications.

For Revenue Cycle Leaders, the stakes are high: billing errors and missed charges not only create compliance risk but also leak revenue and burden clinical and coding staff.  

If you’re still doing infusion and injection coding manually, or only relying on your EHR, you could be missing significant revenue. While EHRs like Epic are powerful tools, they were not built to handle the complexity of infusion and injection coding and billing. 

Let’s explore how Medaptus compares to Epic when it comes to infusion and injection charge capture. 

1. Infusion Charge Logic 

Epic: Relies on manual, custom-built logic (SmartForms, flowsheets, coder input). While it may provide code suggestions, it lacks a true billing engine to calculate and apply the full infusion hierarchy.

Medaptus: Automatically generates the correct code with no added configuration. The engine applies hierarchy, overlaps, and timing logic and sends charges straight to billing for 90% of encounters with zero manual intervention. 

2. Revenue Leakage 

Epic: Because infusion rules aren’t fully accounted for, our customers who were previously using Epic tell us they saw a 30–40% error rate, leading to substantial leakage.

Medaptus: 100% compliant with documentation and minimizes leakage by applying infusion logic correctly and consistently. Almost all charges flow directly to billing without delay. Over 90% accuracy rate. 

3. Coder and Clinician Effort 

Epic: Coders must manually apply infusion logic and clean up errors, while clinicians often enter charges themselves, which takes time away from patient care.

Medaptus: Uses an exception-based workflow. Coders only review encounters requiring attention, while clinicians stay focused on clinical work—not billing. 

4. IT Workload  

Epic: Requires ongoing IT updates to keep infusion charge logic current with coding changes and process tweaks.

Medaptus: Require initial IT investment during implementation. Medaptus works with IT teams for a successful go-live, including testing and user training. Post go-live, Medaptus carries the bulk of the IT work, if any customizations are required.  

5. Cost and ROI 

Epic: While there are usually no upfront software costs, hidden costs emerge in the form of heavy internal resource demands, high coder workload, and revenue leakage.

Medaptus: Offers per-encounter pricing, with ROI driven by both increased revenue capture and labor efficiencies.

Call-Out: The True Cost of Infusion Billing Errors 

Industry research highlights how costly infusion and injection coding mistakes can be: 

• Up to 40% of infusion claims contain errors when handled manually.
• These mistakes drive millions in annual lost revenue for large health systems.
• Every 1% in missed infusion charges can translate into hundreds of thousands of dollars annually for mid-sized hospitals.
• Manual workflows increase compliance risk and expose organizations to audits and penalties. 

The Bottom Line 

Epic may meet baseline infusion billing needs, but its limitations create inefficiencies and lost revenue. Medaptus, on the other hand, is a mission-critical solution for organizations that want to: 

• Eliminate manual infusion billing work 

• Improve charge accuracy and compliance 

• Maximize revenue capture 

Manual infusion billing leaks revenue—automation stops it. 

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) 

Q1. Does Medaptus replace Epic? 

No. Medaptus doesn’t replace Epic—it complements it. We integrate with many EHRs, including Epic (learn more about our Epic integration, here). Epic remains your system of record, while Medaptus automates the infusion billing logic that Epic lacks. The two integrate seamlessly. 

Q2. How much coder time can Medaptus save? 

On average, Medaptus automates coding for 90% of encounters, meaning coders only focus on exceptions instead of manually touching every case. This drastically reduces workload and backlogs. 

Q3. What about compliance risk? 

Medaptus has a built-in rules engine that automatically checks for missing or incorrect documentation, such as stop times, before billing. This reduces compliance risk and downstream audits. 

Q4. Is there a large IT lift to implement Medaptus? 

No. IT support is required for the implementation period, but we do our best to minimize IT workload. Medaptus handles all logic updates post-implementation, removing the ongoing IT burden of infusion billing updates. Epic configurations, on the other hand, often require IT and clinical resources to maintain. 

Q5. How does Medaptus impact revenue? 

By eliminating revenue leakage tied to infusion coding errors (often 30–40% in Epic workflows), Medaptus improves net revenue capture while also cutting labor costs.