SEP-1 reporting software tracks whether the bundle elements CMS specifies were documented within their time windows, supports the abstractor reviewing each case, and produces the evidence behind your reported figure. It measures and organises. It does not determine time zero, decide a case qualifies, or order treatment.
SEP-1 is an all-or-nothing measure judged against a starting timestamp that no system records. Abstractors reconstruct time zero from documentation weeks later, and by then nothing can be changed. Taction builds SEP-1 tooling that surfaces candidate cases during the stay and makes abstraction defensible afterwards, without pretending that a timestamp is a computable field.
Our experts are ready to understand your business goals.
SEP-1 automation does three things: identifies candidate cases from clinical data, tracks whether specified bundle elements appear within their windows relative to a proposed starting point, and supports the abstractor who determines the real answer. It sits alongside our clinical decision support development work and inside the wider healthcare integration programme that supplies its data. The measure’s specification changes between versions, so element definitions and windows are configuration rather than code. Where broader multi-protocol bundle measurement is the need, our clinical workflow optimisation work covers the surrounding redesign rather than the measure itself.
Cases are surfaced from vital signs, laboratory results, orders, diagnoses, and documentation patterns. Candidate identification produces a review list rather than a determination that the measure applies. Volume is reported for tuning.
The starting timestamp governs every window in the measure and is an abstraction judgement. Time zero support presents the evidence and candidate timestamps and leaves the decision to the abstractor.
Each specified element is checked for documentation within its window relative to the proposed start. Element tracking follows the measure version you are reporting against, not a generic model. Definitions carry version history.
The measure carries exclusions that remove cases from the denominator when documented conditions apply. Exclusion logic is configurable and every applied exclusion is recorded with its evidence. Denominator effects are reported separately.
Source documentation, timestamps, orders, and results are assembled for the abstractor in one view. Document assembly is where abstractor time is recovered, since the judgement itself cannot be shortened. Searching is what we remove.
It does not diagnose sepsis, set time zero, order antibiotics or fluids, or attest a reported figure. Those decisions belong to clinicians, abstractors, and your quality leadership. We state that boundary in writing.
The recurring failure is treating the measure as computable. Time zero, exclusion applicability, and whether a documented action satisfies an element all involve judgement, and software that decides them produces numbers your abstractors will not defend. We build for suggestion plus evidence assembly instead. Where the requirement is broader bundle measurement across many protocols rather than this measure specifically, that is a different scope and we will say so during discovery. Where the reported figure aligns with your other quality submissions, definitions are matched to your HEDIS and MIPS and MACRA reporting work.
Vital signs, laboratory results, orders, and administration records wired as evidence through our EHR and EMR integration services. Timestamp precision determines what can honestly be measured. Retrospective entry is flagged rather than trusted.
Candidate cases appear during the stay with outstanding elements and time remaining visible to the unit. Concurrent surfacing is the only version of this that can change an outcome. Worklists reach a defined role.
Element definitions, windows, and exclusions configured to the measure version you report, with history retained. Version configuration means a specification change is not a rebuild. Historical figures retain the definition version that produced them.
Evidence assembly, candidate timestamp presentation, and structured capture of the abstractor’s determinations and rationale. Rationale capture is what makes a reported figure defensible later. Determinations are structured rather than left in free text notes.
Element-level and case-level reporting by unit and period, built on our healthcare data analytics practice. Element reporting shows which element is failing rather than only the aggregate result. Case lists sit behind every figure.
Where prompting is in scope, it is delivered to a defined role using CDS Hooks patterns with volume measured. Prompt governance includes authority to disable any prompt. Volume and override rates are reported continuously.
We publish no figures on measure scores, mortality, length of stay, or abstraction time, because those depend entirely on your case mix, your documentation practice, and your clinical processes. What we deliver is instrumentation so your team measures impact against its own data. The realistic benefits are earlier visibility during the stay and abstraction that is faster and more defensible afterwards. The measure score itself follows from clinical care and documentation, neither of which software provides. Read the items below as visibility and defensibility rather than as any claim about your score.
Candidate cases and outstanding elements are visible while the patient is still admitted. Concurrent visibility is what separates measurement from retrospective post-mortem. Nobody can change an outcome from a report issued after discharge.
Reporting shows which specific element failed most often and where. Element detail directs improvement work at a real cause rather than at the aggregate figure. Aggregate scores hide which single element is costing you cases.
Determinations, rationale, and the evidence viewed are recorded together per case. Recorded rationale is what withstands a validation review or an internal challenge. Validation reviews ask how a determination was reached.
Abstractors open a case with its documentation, timestamps, and results already linked. Pre-assembled evidence is the largest recoverable time cost in this workflow. Abstractors begin reading rather than begin searching across four systems.
Element definitions and windows are configuration, so a specification update is a change rather than a project. Configurable definitions keep historical comparability explicit. Reconfiguration replaces a rebuild each time a specification is updated.
SEP-1 is all-or-nothing, so chasing the measure can distort care. Measure pressure is a real clinical risk, and we build reporting that keeps clinical judgement visible rather than penalised. We report deviation deliberately.
We start with timestamp reality, because the measure depends on times your systems may not record with the precision it assumes. Discovery is paid and time-boxed and produces an itemised fixed-scope estimate with an honest build or configure recommendation. If your existing quality vendor covers abstraction adequately and the gap is concurrent visibility, we scope that alone. Delivery runs in short increments with your abstractors and clinical leadership using working software throughout. Your quality leadership keeps authority over element definitions and prompt thresholds throughout, because they are the people who defend the reported figure afterwards.
We assess whether the times the measure relies on exist, and at what precision. Timestamp gaps are reported honestly rather than filled with plausible proxies. A proxy timestamp produces a number nobody will defend.
Element definitions, windows, and exclusions confirmed against the measure version you report. Definition sign-off comes from your quality leadership before we configure anything. We implement their reading of the specification rather than ours.
The system surfaces cases and measures elements without prompting for several weeks. Silent running establishes the real baseline and the real candidate volume first. It also gives clinicians a baseline they recognise as their own.
Evidence assembly, timestamp candidates, determination capture, and rationale recording built with your abstractors. Abstractor involvement is a delivery condition rather than a courtesy. They use each increment and tell us where it slows them down.
Recipients, timing, repetition, and stop conditions designed against observed volume with clinical leadership. Prompt thresholds are agreed jointly and reviewable afterwards. Every prompt receives an explicit stop condition before it is enabled.
Unit-by-unit rollout with a review cadence for definitions and prompts, then handover to a named owner. Configuration handover lets your team absorb the next version change. Disabling a prompt requires no change request.
We build SEP-1 tooling as a measurement and abstraction support platform. Element definitions follow the measure specification your quality leadership confirms, with version history retained so historical figures stay explicable. Compliance covers HIPAA safeguards, audit sufficient to reconstruct an abstraction, and clear allocation of every determination to a person. Measure definitions themselves are CMS specifications referenced as such: we implement to them and make no claim to interpret them on your behalf. We also treat prompting as a separate approval with its own clinical governance, because it changes what clinicians experience at the bedside rather than only what reporting shows.
The software measures and supports. It does not diagnose, order, or triage, and clinical actions remain decisions clinicians take, sign, and are accountable for. Nothing is ordered or transmitted without an individual signature.
We decline to build automatic ordering of antibiotics, fluids, or laboratory tests to satisfy a measure. Measure pressure must not become a system that orders treatment for a patient. That refusal precedes contracting.
Time zero, exclusion applicability, element satisfaction, and the reported figure are abstractor and leadership determinations. The software presents evidence and records decisions. No reported figure originates from software rather than from a person.
Element delivery is reported by subgroup so uneven bundle delivery is visible. Subgroup reporting is produced before deployment, and adverse findings are treated as a gate. Findings are reviewed with clinical leadership before launch.
Prompt volume, override rates, and per-recipient load are measured and reviewed on a fixed cadence. Named owners hold authority to disable any prompt immediately. Reviews happen on a fixed cadence rather than on complaint.
Determinations, rationale, evidence viewed, and the definition version applied are all retained. Version audit explains why a figure from two years ago differs from today’s. Reconstruction of an abstraction remains possible years afterwards.
We have been building healthcare software since 2013, which is over 12 years, and we have delivered more than 200 healthcare projects. We built our own EHR platform, Voyant Health, so vital sign flowsheets, order timestamps, and administration records are working knowledge rather than assumptions. We are ISO 27001 certified, our leadership brings more than 20 years of personal experience in the field, and we work from four US offices in Chicago, Cheyenne, Austin, and Sacramento. We will also tell you when your existing quality vendor already covers what you actually need.
We build timestamp suggestion, not timestamp determination. That distinction is the difference between abstraction your team defends and numbers they quietly work around. Abstractors notice immediately when a system pretends otherwise, and stop trusting it.
Prompting is never enabled before a silent baseline exists. That sequence delays visible progress deliberately and prevents the alert fatigue that ends adoption. We would rather lose several weeks than lose clinical goodwill permanently.
Building Voyant Health means we know which timestamps are reliable, which are entered retrospectively, and which should never anchor a measure. Flowsheet timing quality varies by unit, and we test it directly.
Taction is ISO 27001 certified, with documented access control, encryption, and change control that stands up to a customer security review. Definition and prompt changes carry the same change control as code.
We will not build treatment ordering triggered by measure logic. That refusal costs us work occasionally and keeps a clinical decision where it belongs. It appears in our proposals rather than only in conversation.
Four US offices in Chicago, Cheyenne, Austin, and Sacramento, with delivery overlapping your hours through clinical review and rollout. Escalation reaches a named delivery lead rather than a support queue.
SEP-1 pricing turns on your timestamp data quality, whether concurrent surfacing and prompting are in scope, and how many facilities report. The tiers below cover engineering. Third-party licensing, cloud infrastructure, data subscriptions, and hardware are separate from engineering cost and itemised clearly. Where your reported submission runs through a quality vendor or requires formal measure certification, that is a separate regulated scope with its own cost, and we scope it separately rather than implying it fits here. Prompt tuning after launch is quoted as recurring work rather than as a fixed deliverable.
$40,000 to $80,000 for candidate identification, element tracking, and abstraction support at one facility without interruptive prompting. Prompting can follow in a later phase, once a silent baseline exists to design against.
$80,000 to $200,000 for concurrent surfacing, unit worklists, governed prompting, exclusion handling, subgroup reporting, and full abstraction workflow with rationale capture. This tier covers most single-facility sepsis programmes we are asked to scope.
Starting at $200,000 for multi-facility programmes with central definition governance, per-site variance reporting, prompt burden management, and multi-EHR integration. Facility count and EHR instance count drive the figure more than volume.
A paid, time-boxed discovery phase produces a timestamp and data audit, element definition review, build or configure recommendation, and an itemised fixed-scope estimate. The timestamp audit is yours whether or not we build.
Timestamp precision, documentation structure, facility count, prompting scope, and EHR instance count. Retrospective documentation raises cost more than case volume does. Times entered retrospectively are the single hardest constraint to work around.
Budget annually for measure version changes, definition reconfiguration, prompt tuning, subgroup validation refresh, and EHR upgrade regression testing. Version changes recur predictably. Specification updates arrive predictably and are budgeted as scheduled work.
If your sepsis abstraction happens weeks after discharge and nobody can see outstanding elements during a stay, start with a timestamp audit. A paid discovery phase gives you an honest assessment of which times your systems record and at what precision, an element definition review against the version you report, a build or configure recommendation, and an itemised fixed-scope estimate. If your existing quality vendor covers what you need, you keep the audit and spend nothing further with us.
These are the questions quality directors, sepsis programme leads, and CMIOs raise before scoping SEP-1 work. Several concern the measure’s genuine difficulty rather than any software limitation, particularly time zero. One concerns something we refuse to build. Where an answer depends on your documentation practice or your current quality vendor, the timestamp audit in discovery resolves it quickly and is worth having regardless of what you build. We would rather explain honestly why time zero cannot be computed than sell you a system that pretends it can and produces figures your abstractors quietly override.
No, and we would distrust any vendor claiming it can. Time zero is reconstructed from documentation by an abstractor applying judgement, and the measure’s entire window structure hangs on it. We surface candidate timestamps with their evidence, record which one the abstractor chose and why, and make that decision reviewable.
We make no claim on a figure. The score reflects clinical recognition, treatment, and documentation. What the software provides is earlier visibility of outstanding elements during the stay, element-level failure detail, and defensible abstraction, so your team can act and measure against its own baseline rather than against a national average.
No. Automatically ordering antibiotics, fluids, or laboratory tests because measure logic fired moves a treatment decision into a rules engine acting on incomplete information. Measure pressure is exactly the wrong reason to cross that line, and we say so before contracting rather than after a statement of work is signed.
Exclusion logic is configured to the measure version you report, applied only where documented conditions support it, and recorded with the evidence and the abstractor’s confirmation. Exclusions materially affect your denominator, so silent automatic application would be indefensible in a validation review and we do not build it that way.
Element definitions, windows, and exclusions are configuration with version history, so a specification change is reconfiguration rather than a rebuild. Historical figures retain the definition version that produced them, which is what lets you explain why last year’s number is not directly comparable to this year’s.
Usually not, and often it should not. Many organisations keep their vendor for submission and abstraction of record while using this for concurrent visibility and evidence assembly. We assess your current arrangement during discovery and scope only the gap rather than proposing replacement by default.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Our expert reaches out shortly after receiving your request and analyzing your requirements.
If needed, we sign an NDA to protect your privacy.
We request additional information to better understand and analyze your project.
We schedule a call to discuss your project, goals. and priorities, and provide preliminary feedback.
If you're satisfied, we finalize the agreement and start your project.