Epic Integration and Automation Services
We build to Epic’s documented integration patterns and we plan the approval path alongside the engineering. That means knowing which capability is available through which channel, what the customer’s Epic analysts will need from you, and what Epic will not permit regardless of how you ask.
What breaks today
The wrong integration channel is chosen first
Teams reach for the API they can read documentation for rather than the one that actually carries the data they need.
Interface approval is treated as a formality
The customer’s Epic team has a queue and a change calendar. Projects that ignore both slip by months.
Write-back is assumed
Reading from Epic is comparatively straightforward. Writing into it is constrained, and discovering that late reshapes the whole design.
Test environments are scarce
Access to a non-production Epic environment is a scheduled resource, not an on-demand one, and it needs planning from day one.
What we build
Scoped during the assessment, then delivered in one to three week increments against your real systems.
FHIR R4 integration
Read and, where supported, write interactions against Epic’s FHIR endpoints, scoped and authorized to Epic’s published patterns.
HL7 v2 interfaces
ADT, ORU, ORM, SIU, and DFT interfaces through the customer’s interface engine, with error handling designed for real message volume.
SMART on FHIR applications
In-context applications launched from the Epic workspace with correct launch context, scopes, and session handling.
Interconnect and web service integration
Where the workflow needs capability beyond published FHIR, we work through Interconnect web services with the customer’s Epic team.
Integration approval planning
A documented path through the customer’s Epic governance, including what their analysts need from you and when.
What changes
Ranges reflect what comparable engagements have produced. Your baseline is measured during the assessment before anyone commits to a number.
- Integration channel chosen against actual capability rather than documentation availability
- Approval and change-calendar path planned before engineering starts
- Write-back constraints identified in design rather than in testing
- Interfaces that survive production message volume and failure modes
Systems this touches
Integration channel is chosen on verified capability in your environment, not on what is easiest to document.
- Epic FHIR R4
- SMART on FHIR
- Epic Interconnect
- HL7 v2 ADT / ORU / ORM / SIU / DFT
- Epic Vendor Services
- Care Everywhere
Not sure this is the right workflow to start with? The $24,997 assessment exists to answer exactly that, and it frequently points somewhere other than where leadership expected.
Common Questions
Are you an Epic partner?
We are an independent engineering firm, not an Epic reseller. We build to Epic’s published integration patterns and work through the customer’s own Epic relationship and governance, which is how the majority of third-party integration is actually delivered.
How long does an Epic integration take?
Engineering is rarely the constraint. A straightforward read-only FHIR integration is typically weeks of build; the approval, environment access, and testing path through the customer’s Epic team usually sets the real timeline. We scope both explicitly.
Talk it through with an engineer.
Tell us what this workflow costs you today and we will tell you honestly whether automating it is worth the engagement.
Start with a conversation, not a proposal.
A 45-minute call with a senior engineer. We will tell you honestly whether automation is the right answer for the workflow you have in mind.