#216 We Tested AI on our Own Billing. It Backfired Once
We've spent a lot of time meeting with AI companies and testing technology in our own billing process. The lesson wasn't that AI can't help, it's that a tool solving one task can still make the whole revenue cycle harder without a designed handoff.
• Lesson 1, fragmentation: Most AI vendors do one part of the job. The handoff to the next owner is what makes or breaks the value.
• Lesson 2, implementation tax: A demo shows minutes of clean workflow. A live practice needs configuration, training, and an exception process.
• Lesson 3, accuracy: Accuracy is a workflow result, measured with a baseline, not a demo result.
• Lesson 4, staff concerns: Concerns about job security and quality are legitimate and need a named workflow owner, not a dismissal.
• Lesson 5, ROI: ROI depends on size, volume, and starting problem. Smaller practices should start with one focused workflow.
HIPAA note: do not put patient identifiers, clinical data, or payment information into a general-purpose AI tool without a signed Business Associate Agreement.
Three actions this week:
• Before adding any AI point solution, ask who owns the exception handoff
• Set a measurable baseline before starting any AI pilot
• Ask any AI vendor what percentage of transactions require human review in a live environment
Episode breakdown
• 00:00 Hook
• 00:40 Why this matters right now
• 02:30 Lesson 1: fragmentation
• 06:00 Lesson 2: the implementation tax
• 10:00 Lesson 3: accuracy as a workflow result
• 13:00 Lesson 4: staff concerns
• 16:00 Lesson 5: ROI by size and volume
• 18:30 The four-question framework
• 20:00 Close
Resources
• NatRevMD AI Kit: eligibility.natrevmd.com/natrevmd-ai-kit-tool (redacted
• EMR/PM Evaluation Framework: eligibility.natrevmd.com/emp/pm-evaluation-framework (redacted
• Metrics Audit Review (free, physician-led): eligibility.natrevmd.com/metrics-audit-natrevmd (redacted
• Source: Healthcare IT News, August 24, 2026 survey