Does DeepScribe Integrate With eClinicalWorks?

On eClinicalWorks interfaces that DeepScribe has not named publicly. The claims themselves tell you something. Reading prior visits, medications and labs before the encounter is consistent with the certified FHIR API, which exposes the core clinical data set to an authorised app. Writing into specific progress note sections is not something FHIR models well on eCW, and generally implies either the proprietary API or a document based write through HL7 with section markers. Which it is determines who has to be involved on your side: a FHIR app is authorised by the practice itself, while an HL7 interface or proprietary API connection usually involves an eClinicalWorks request and a fee.

DeepScribe's differentiator is specialty formatting and coding for risk bearing groups, and it cites a KLAS score of 98.8 and a 95.9 percent major defect free rate from its own quality programme. On eCW, where many practices are primary care and community health, ask for a reference in your setting rather than the oncology and orthopaedics references DeepScribe leads with.

Before the visit it loads context from the eCW chart. During the visit it records with consent. After the visit it produces a specialty structured note and routes the sections into the eCW progress note, with coding suggestions, for the clinician to review and sign in eClinicalWorks. DeepScribe describes the routing as section specific, meaning the ROS lands in ROS and the plan in the plan, which is the difference between a note the clinician can sign and one they have to rearrange.

What is not published for eCW: whether assessments land as structured diagnoses in the assessment section, whether orders are created, and how a failed write is surfaced. The ambient scribe use case page lists the write back questions that separate scribe tiers, and they apply here with one addition: ask to see the eCW encounter, not the DeepScribe screen.

For groups with HCC exposure the coding output is the financial case and a compliance obligation in equal measure. The coding automation page covers the review policy, and the charge capture leakage calculator tells you whether the under coding you are trying to fix is large enough to pay for a coding oriented scribe over a cheaper one.

On eClinicalWorks the practice authorises the app itself, so the approvals are yours. If DeepScribe uses the FHIR path, a practice administrator authorises the application against your data. If it uses HL7 or the proprietary API, someone raises a request with eClinicalWorks, asks in writing what it costs and how long it takes, and tracks it. Either way you sign a BAA directly with DeepScribe, decide which clinicians and specialties go first, and own the relationship when a write fails.

Because the product reads the chart before the visit, ask what is retained from that read and for how long, including for patients who are scheduled but not seen. The HIPAA and AI page sets out the retention, subprocessor, model training and breach notification terms, and the scribe compliance checklist puts the steps in order.

DeepScribe is sales led with no self serve signup or free trial. Plan a procurement with a named owner and a decision date, and ask eClinicalWorks directly how third party API access has behaved over the past year, because the platform sells a competing product.

• Interface not named. DeepScribe describes API level, bidirectional integration without saying which eCW interface. Not published. Checked September 2026.
• No published pricing, no trial. The DeepScribe pricing page covers what to ask for, including minimum term.
• Structured diagnoses and orders not documented for eCW. Inspect a test encounter.
• Competing incumbent controls the platform. Sunoh.ai is eClinicalWorks' own product with a published price of 149 US dollars per user per month as a limited time rate.
• Specialty references skew to oncology and surgical specialties. Ask for an eCW primary care or community health reference if that is your setting.
• Pre visit chart read expands the data footprint. Confirm retention for scheduled but unseen patients.

Ask DeepScribe, in writing: which eClinicalWorks interface the integration uses; exactly which chart data is read before the visit and how long it is retained; which sections are written and what happens when they already contain text; whether diagnoses and orders land as structured entries; how a failed write is surfaced; where audio and transcripts are stored and for how long; whether your data trains shared models; the price per clinician and minimum term; and the offboarding process. The EHR integration question list is the full set.

Ask eClinicalWorks: what the interface DeepScribe needs costs and how long activation takes; whether anything in your agreement constrains third party scribes; and what Sunoh.ai would cost on the same terms.

Then trial DeepScribe against Sunoh.ai on the same real encounters in your specialty and inspect the eCW note after each. The scribe comparison sets out what to score.

DeepScribe's eClinicalWorks claims are strong and the interface behind them is undisclosed, while the incumbent is cheaper to buy and controlled by the platform. Resolving that takes a test patient, an inspection of the encounter and a reading of two contracts. Clunic takes no vendor commissions. Our vendor selection engagement runs DeepScribe and Sunoh.ai against your own encounters and coding history, verifies the integration on your instance, and tells you which to choose and what to negotiate. If coding oversight is the concern, AI governance and compliance builds the review policy first. Book a call to start.