Currently accepting select engagements

Prior Authorization Automation for Healthcare Practices

Most healthcare teams know they need AI. Fewer understand how to build the closed-loop agentic workflows that actually eliminate CO-197 prior-auth denials and recover at-risk revenue. I help healthcare operations stop the fax-and-phone-call prior auth grind that delays care and loses revenue, and ship systems that survive real users.

-72%
CO-197 prior-auth denials on representative engagements
85%
PA requests auto-submitted without manual entry
12 hrs
Saved weekly on phone-based status checks
The AI Implementation Gap

The gap most leaders feel but can’t quite name

Companies in healthcare know AI can create leverage. What they often experience instead is another tool that creates more work, dashboards no one trusts, or pilots that never scale. The difference is rarely the model. It is the agentic architecture: reliable loops that monitor data, analyze patterns, surface true exceptions, and route decisions so humans only handle what requires judgment.

Prior authorization is the most avoidable source of denied revenue in healthcare. A procedure requires PA, nobody catches it at scheduling, the procedure happens, the claim denies as CO-197 (prior authorization absent), and the practice is left writing off the balance or chasing the patient for a bill that should never have existed.

I am Zack Shields, and I build prior authorization automation that detects PA requirements at scheduling, auto-gathers the clinical documentation, submits the payer-specific PA request, and polls for approval status. The whole loop runs before the procedure, so the visit goes out clean instead of denying weeks later.

Every engagement is HIPAA-aligned: BAAs with every vendor, encryption at rest, role-based access, full audit logging, no PHI in third-party LLM training paths. Metrics on this page are representative outcomes, not promises for any specific clinic.

The problem

Why manual prior auth keeps failing

Prior auth requirements are payer-specific, CPT-specific, and sometimes diagnosis-specific. A procedure that needs no auth for one payer might require extensive documentation for another. There is no universal list, and keeping the rules current is a full-time job nobody has.

The submission itself is a grind. A staff member gathers clinical notes, fills out a payer-specific form (or faxes one, in many cases), and waits. Some payers respond in 24 hours, some take 14 days, and the status check requires daily phone calls to the payer.

When the procedure happens before the PA comes back, the claim denies. When the patient reschedules because PA has not arrived, the practice loses the visit. Either way, the cost of manual PA handling is enormous and mostly hidden in the workarounds the team does to cope.

Solutions

What prior authorization automation does

A closed loop that runs the entire PA workflow before the procedure:

  • 01

    PA Requirement Detection

    Cross-references scheduled CPT codes against payer-specific PA rules (sourced from payer policy documents, refreshed quarterly) and flags any service that needs authorization before scheduling completes.

  • 02

    Clinical Documentation Auto-Gather

    Pulls the relevant clinical notes, lab results, imaging reports, and medication history from the EHR based on the payer-specific documentation requirements for that procedure.

  • 03

    Payer-Specific PA Submission

    Submits the PA request through the payer portal or EDI 278 transaction with the right forms, the right attachments, and the right clinical narrative. No more fax-and-pray.

  • 04

    Status Polling & Alerts

    Automated polling of payer portals for PA status. Approvals posted to the schedule, requests for more information routed to the clinical team, expirations tracked so a PA never silently lapses.

Going deeper

A technical look at prior authorization automation

EDI 278 and the PA transaction

EDI 278 is the HIPAA transaction for healthcare services review, which covers prior authorization. It supports submission, modification, and status queries. Where a payer supports 278, it is the fastest, cleanest path: structured request, structured response, no portal navigation.

Not all payers support 278 (or support it well). For those payers, the automation falls back to portal RPA: log in, navigate to the PA form, fill it out, attach the documentation, submit. Slower and more brittle, but reliable when properly maintained.

Clinical documentation auto-gather

Each payer has documentation requirements per procedure type. A knee MRI for BCBS might need a recent orthopedic note, a conservative-treatment history, and a physical exam. The same MRI for Cigna might need different documentation. Maintaining the rule set is itself work.

The automation maintains a payer-by-procedure documentation matrix (sourced from payer policy documents, refreshed quarterly). When a PA is needed, it pulls the right clinical notes from the EHR based on that matrix and attaches them to the submission. The clinical team reviews the package before it goes out.

Status polling without phone calls

Most PA status checks today are phone calls: a staff member dials the payer, navigates the IVR, waits on hold, and asks for status. Multiply by 50 pending PAs and you have a full-time job that nobody wants.

The automation polls payer portals on a schedule (daily for routine PAs, more often for urgent ones), pulls the status, and updates the schedule. Approvals post automatically. Requests for more information route to the clinical team immediately. Phone-based status work shrinks to exception handling only.

Outcomes

What changes when PA runs as a loop

  • CO-197 denials drop

    When PA detection fires at scheduling and submission runs automatically, the missing-auth denials that were quietly written off stop accumulating.

  • Procedures happen on schedule

    Patients get the care they need on the originally scheduled date instead of being rescheduled because PA has not come back in time.

  • Staff stops living on hold

    Phone-based status checks (the worst manual task in healthcare administration) shrink to exception handling only. Representative engagements save 10+ hours per week per staff member.

  • Clinical documentation is complete the first time

    Auto-gather pulls the right notes for the right payer the first time, so PAs do not bounce back for missing documentation.

Process

How a prior authorization engagement runs

Scoped to your EHR, your payers, and your scheduling workflow:

  1. 011

    PA Workflow Mapping

    I sit with your scheduling and clinical teams, map every step from scheduling to PA approval, identify where the manual work happens, and document the current denial rate on CO-197.

  2. 022

    Detection & Submission Loop

    We ship PA detection at scheduling and payer-specific submission for your top 5 payers in 3 to 4 weeks. PAs start submitting automatically for those payers.

  3. 033

    Status Polling & Documentation

    We add automated status polling, auto-gather of clinical documentation, and PA expiration tracking. Each phase measured on CO-197 denial rate and on-time procedure rate.

  4. 044

    Handoff & Documentation

    Your team gets runbooks and training to operate and extend the system. Optional retainer for payer policy changes and quarterly rule refresh.

Why work with me

Why practices choose me for prior authorization automation

Prior auth is not solved by adding a chatbot to your patient portal. It is solved by integrating with your EHR, your payer portals, and your clinical documentation systems in a coordinated way. That integration work is where most PA projects fail, and it is what I do.

HIPAA-aligned from day one. BAAs with every vendor, encryption at rest, role-based access, full audit logging, no PHI in third-party LLM training paths. The architecture is built for a compliance review, not around one.

What you get

  • Ships the first PA loop in 3 to 4 weeks
  • Payer-specific submission, not one-size-fits-all
  • EDI 278 plus portal automation for full payer coverage
  • HIPAA-aligned architecture with BAAs throughout
  • Measured against CO-197 denial rate and on-time procedure rate
Tools & stack

Tools I use on prior auth engagements

Matched to the payers, EHR, and documentation sources you actually use.

  • n8n or custom Python

    Orchestration tying scheduling, EHR, payer portals, and documentation gather

  • EDI 278 (via clearinghouse)

    Structured PA submission and status query where payer supports it

  • Playwright / Selenium

    Portal automation for payers without 278 support

  • Epic App Orchard / Cerner Code / Athenahealth API

    Native EHR integration for clinical documentation gather

  • RAG over payer policy docs

    PA requirement lookup per CPT and payer

  • Postgres + deadline engine

    PA tracking with approval, expiration, and follow-up date management

Comparison

Manual prior auth vs. automated PA workflow

Honest side-by-side based on a mid-size clinic submitting 50 to 150 PA requests per week.

Aspect

DIY / off-the-shelf

Working with me

PA detection at scheduling

Manual check, often skipped

Automatic cross-reference of CPT against payer PA rules

Documentation gather

Manual chart review per PA, 15 to 30 minutes

Auto-gather based on payer-specific documentation matrix

Submission

Portal form fill or fax

EDI 278 or portal automation, payer-specific

Status checks

Daily phone calls, 10+ hours/week per staff member

Automated polling, exceptions only to humans

CO-197 denial rate

Stubbornly high, the most common avoidable denial

Down 50%+ on representative engagements

On-time procedure rate

Frequent rescheduling due to PA not back in time

Up as PAs land before the scheduled date

FAQ

Frequently asked questions.

  • Which payers can you automate PA for?

    The major commercial payers (Aetna, BCBS, Cigna, Humana, UnitedHealthcare), Medicare Advantage plans, and most Florida Medicaid managed care organizations. Integration is via portal automation where no API exists, with monitoring when portals change.

  • How does EDI 278 fit in?

    EDI 278 is the HIPAA transaction for healthcare services review (prior auth). Where payers support it, the automation uses 278 for submission and status. Where they do not, the automation falls back to portal RPA. The right path depends on the payer.

  • Does this replace our prior auth nurses?

    No. The point is to remove the manual submission, status-checking, and documentation-gathering so your clinical staff focuses on the complex cases that need clinical judgment. The system handles the routine path so humans handle the exceptions.

  • How is PHI handled in the documentation gather?

    Clinical documentation stays inside your EHR or a HIPAA-aligned environment with BAAs in place. The gather step pulls the right notes based on payer requirements, but no PHI enters third-party LLM training paths. Full audit logging throughout.

  • What about PA expirations?

    Every approved PA gets an expiration date tracked. Alerts fire 14, 7, and 3 days before expiration so the procedure can be rescheduled into the window or the PA can be renewed before it lapses. Silent expirations stop.

The operator behind the systems

About your consultant.

I am Zack Shields. I build agentic systems for mid-market and enterprise teams in hospitality, travel, healthcare, and finance. Closed-loop workflows that monitor data, surface true exceptions, route decisions, and act so your team only handles what requires judgment.

My background is operations first, technology second: real estate operations, hospitality systems, short-term rental workflows, sales operations, dashboards, RAG tools, API integrations, and team training. That mix matters because the hard part is rarely the model. The hard part is designing a system people trust enough to use. One that survives real users, edge cases, and daily reality.

When you work with me, you get an operator-builder hybrid who can map the workflow, design the agentic loop, build the system, test the edge cases, document the process, and support adoption after launch.

12+ years operating contextClosed-loop agentic systemsOperator-builder hybrid
Getting started

Getting started is simple.

The first step is a no-obligation 30-minute workflow review. We map your actual workflows, identify high-leverage agentic opportunities, and give you an honest picture of fit. No pitch.

  1. 01

    Book your call

    Schedule a focused conversation about the workflow you want to improve.

  2. 02

    Share your challenges

    Walk through the systems, users, exceptions, and reporting gaps that shape the work.

  3. 03

    Get your roadmap

    Leave with practical next steps for discovery, pilot scope, or implementation.

Book a workflow review

Ready to stop losing visits and revenue to missing prior auth?

Book a free 30-minute prior authorization workflow review. Bring your CO-197 denial count and a sample of last months PA submissions. You will leave with a candid take on what is automatable.

No pitch, no obligation. You'll hear back within one business day.

Free
Cost
30 min
Length
None
Pressure