Implementation services · Physician-led EHR delivery
ReMedi Health Solutions
ReMedi Health Solutions is a physician-led healthcare IT consulting firm offering EHR implementation, personalization, chart abstraction, training, go-live, and optimization across Epic, Oracle Health, MEDITECH, and related platforms. It is not an EHR product.
Strong fit
- Health systems that want physician informaticists running personalization and go-live coaching
- Epic or Oracle Health programs where chart abstraction and peer training are on the critical path
- Buyers measuring clinician adoption and after-go-live efficiency, not only staffing fill rates
Weak fit
- Organizations that only need commodity at-the-elbow bodies without clinical coaching
- Buyers seeking a pure staffing marketplace with no delivery methodology
- Groups that will not fund physician time for personalization labs
Bottom line
ReMedi earns a Recommend for health systems that treat clinician adoption as the main EHR risk. The firm is physician-led and leans on peer personalization, chart abstraction, and go-live coaching rather than pure staff augmentation. Outcomes stories emphasize survey scores and pre-go-live 1:1 sessions. Pricing is project-quote. Score sits near Ellit Groups on this board for a clinically shaped delivery posture beside larger SI brands.
Score breakdown
Weights: Outcomes 35% · Product 30% · Implementation 20% · Pricing clarity 15%.
ReMedi Health Solutions is a physician-led healthcare IT consulting firm focused on EHR implementation, personalization, chart abstraction, training, and go-live support across Epic, Oracle Health, MEDITECH, and related platforms.
It is a delivery partner, not an EHR product. Compare Tegria or Nordic when you need a larger SI bench, and Ellit Groups when boutique EHR delivery is the buying reason.
Score reflects a clear clinician-adoption thesis with ordinary consulting pricing opacity.
Competitor landscape
| Vendor | Overall | Speed to go-live |
|---|---|---|
| ReMedi Health Solutions | 7.5 | 7.3 |
| Ellit Groups | 7.5 | 7.2 |
| Tegria | 7.6 | 7.7 |
| HPG | 7.3 | 7.1 |
| Morgan Hunter Healthcare | 7.1 | 6.9 |
| Impact Advisors | 7.1 | 7.2 |
Pricing
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Model | Physician-led EHR consulting sold as project and staffed engagements covering advisory, training, go-live, abstraction, and optimization. |
| What usually drives cost | Physician informaticist mix, chart abstraction volume, go-live duration, and EHR vendor scope. |
| What to ask in diligence | All-in cost for personalization labs and go-live weeks versus a commodity ATE bench, with named clinical leads on the SOW. |
| Published pricing | Public list price: not published. |
Prerequisites for purchase
| Need | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| What you need to get ReMedi Health Solutions to function | |
| Named CMIO or physician champion for personalization | Peer coaching stalls without clinical ownership. |
| Clear EHR vendor scope and go-live date | Vague timelines waste physician informaticist weeks. |
| Access to training environments and user settings labs | Personalization cannot run on production alone. |
| Chart abstraction inventory and source-system map | Missing PAMI lists create go-live chart chaos. |
| Internal application owners beside consultants | Knowledge walks out when the SOW ends. |
| What will maximize your value | |
| Measure personalization completion and clinician survey scores | Body count is not adoption. |
| Finish abstraction before go-live week | Legacy lookups erase the ROI story. |
| Schedule 1:1 sessions by specialty, not only classroom hours | Specialty workflows differ. |
| Keep a hypercare owner after go-live | Day-two tickets decide whether physicians stay happy. |
| Retire shadow tip sheets after the new build is stable | Dual processes confuse staff. |
| Deal-breakers | |
| You only want anonymous ATE staffing with no clinical coaching. | |
| No physician time is funded for personalization labs. | |
| EHR vendor and go-live date are undecided. | |
| Chart abstraction scope cannot be inventoried. | |
| Leadership expects zero workflow change. | |
Value creation time frame
| # | Stage | Typical range |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Contract signed → kickoff | 2-4 weeks (security, SOW refinement, environment access) |
| 2 | Kickoff → first live cohort or go-live support | 6-16 weeks depending on personalization and abstraction volume |
| 3 | First live workflow → steady value | 1-3 months of hypercare and optimization |
Methodology
| Weight | Factor | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| 35% | Customer outcomes | Whether buyers get measurable operational or clinical-workflow results after go-live |
| 30% | Product | Capability depth, reliability, and fit for the job the category actually buys |
| 20% | Implementation | How hard it is to stand up, integrate, train, and stabilize |
| 15% | Pricing clarity | Whether a buyer can model total cost without a mystery quote |
| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Highly recommend | Strong outcomes and product with manageable caveats |
| Recommend | Solid fit for the right buyer; know the tradeoffs |
| Conditional | Only with a specific use case or heavy caveats |
| Not recommended | Avoid for most buyers in this category |
Read our full methodology for how we weight scores and assign recommend labels.