Unwrapped

Teardown · akasa

AKASA

AKASA

CategoryHealthcare RCMFunding · undisclosedSite ↗
  • Andreessen Horowitz

Clinical docs + billing data + LLM APIs + RCM workflow.

01

Public data / API layer

Clinical documentation
Clinical documentationYours
Hospital billing records
Hospital billing recordsYours
ICD-10
ICD-10Public
CPT codes
CPT codesLicensed
Payer authorization rules
Payer authorization rulesAPI

Internal replication score

Medium
0.45

Feasibility of a useful internal substitute built with Claude (or similar), the same data access, and light agent logic — not rebuilding the whole product.

IRS = 0.30·D + 0.25·L + 0.20·O + 0.15·R + 0.10·Sthis record · 45%
  • D

    Data accessibility

    weight 0.300.40
    • 1.0mostly customer-owned / public / standard third-party sources
    • 0.5mixed accessibility
    • 0.0hard-to-access or proprietary source layer
  • L

    LLM substitutability

    weight 0.250.60
    • 1.0mostly retrieve / prompt / cite / summarize / classify / compare
    • 0.5mixed standard + custom behavior
    • 0.0strongly custom model behavior (fine-tunes on proprietary data, etc.)
  • O

    Output simplicity

    weight 0.200.50
    • 1.0straightforward internal work product (memo, list, reply, SQL query)
    • 0.5moderately specialized
    • 0.0highly specialized (e.g. FDA-graded clinical text)
  • R

    Review / risk tolerance

    weight 0.150.30
    • 1.0internal use with human review is acceptable
    • 0.5moderate risk
    • 0.0very low tolerance for error (e.g. external legal filings)
  • S

    Surface complexity

    weight 0.10inverse — higher means less surface dependence0.40
    • 1.0a simple internal shell is enough
    • 0.5polished workflow matters somewhat
    • 0.0product surface / rollout / trust posture is central to value
LabelsEasy ≥ 0.67Medium ≥ 0.34Hard < 0.34

Missing factor rows use heuristics from wrapper scores. Editorial heuristic, not investment advice.

Build it yourself

Recreate the workflow inside your org.

Internal build

Build it yourself

Same clinical docs + billing data + LLM API + RCM prompts — integration with existing systems is the work.

Internal use only. Replacing them in-market is a different bar than replaying the useful workflow inside your org.

01 · Connectors & flow

Clinical documentation
Clinical documentation
Hospital billing records
Hospital billing records
ICD-10
ICD-10
CPT codes
CPT codes
Payer authorization rules
Payer authorization rules

Internal build map

Data in

Connectors
Connectors

Agent layer

Planner
Tools + retrieval
Reasoning model

Logic

LLM API
retrieve
flag gaps
suggest codes
check compliance
cite sources
not custom weights

Outputs

Internal search
Answer
Citations

02 · Claude / agent prompt

Paste as the system or developer message in Claude (or your agent runtime). Scroll to read; Copy grabs the full text.

Claude / agent prompt

// Revenue cycle documentation assistant You are a revenue cycle assistant inside [YOUR_HEALTH_SYSTEM]. You help coders, CDI specialists, and billing staff using ONLY materials they are allowed to access: clinical notes from the EHR, billing records, ICD-10/CPT code sets, payer authorization rules, and publicly available coding guidelines. ## What you must do 1. Retrieve first: Pull relevant clinical documentation, prior coding decisions, and payer rules before making suggestions. 2. Flag gaps: Surface missing documentation, incomplete clinical details, or code-to-diagnosis mismatches that could cause denials. 3. Suggest codes rigorously: Propose ICD-10 and CPT codes with specific citations to documentation. Highlight compliance risks. 4. Check authorization: Query payer systems for auth status and flag missing pre-authorizations. 5. Cite sources: Every recommendation must reference the specific clinical note, billing record, or coding guideline that supports it. 6. Surface conflicts: If documentation contradicts coding or payer rules are ambiguous, flag for human review. 7. Scope: You assist with coding, CDI, authorization checks, and claim status — not clinical diagnosis or treatment decisions. ## What you are not Not a replacement for certified coders or CDI specialists. All coding and billing decisions require human review and approval before submission. Internal use only. ## Refusal Refuse if asked to code without supporting clinical documentation, bypass payer authorization rules, or make clinical treatment recommendations. Defer to human experts when documentation is ambiguous or payer rules conflict. ## Safety Internal posture: suggestions are reviewed by certified staff before claims submission. No automated coding or billing submissions without human approval.

03 · Result

Does this chart have sufficient documentation to support a sepsis diagnosis code?
Clinical documentation + ICD-10 coding guidelines

Chart lacks specific SIRS criteria documentation. CDI review recommended before final coding.