Texas
Attorney
General
Ken
Paxton
sued
Epic
this
week,
alleging
that
the
company
is
monopolizing
the
EHR
market
and
restricting
patients’
access
to
their
own
medical
data.
Epic’s
EHR
systems
are
installed
in
more
than
3,600
hospitals
in
the
U.S.,
giving
the
company
roughly
42%
of
the
acute
care
hospital
EHR
market
—
far
more
than
any
competitor
like
Oracle
Cerner
or
Meditech.
The
Verona,
Wisconsin-based
company
generated
$5.7
billion
in
revenue
last
year.
The
lawsuit
not
only
claims
that
Epic
uses
its
dominant
position
to
stifle
competition,
but
also
that
it
blocks
parents’
access
to
their
children’s
medical
records
once
they
reach
a
certain
age.
“We
will
not
allow
woke
corporations
to
undermine
the
sacred
rights
of
parents
to
protect
and
oversee
their
kids’
medical
well-being,”
Paxton
said
in
a
statement.
“This
lawsuit
aims
to
ensure
that
Texans
can
readily
obtain
access
to
these
records
and
benefit
from
the
lower
costs
and
innovation
that
come
from
a
truly
competitive
electronic
health
records
market.”
Epic
has
denied
the
allegations,
calling
them
misguided.
What
is
being
alleged?
The
complaint,
filed
Wednesday,
argues
that
Epic
leverages
its
market
dominance
to
prevent
hospitals
from
moving
to
competing
EHR
systems
—
and
that
this
practice
has
effectively
shut
out
rival
vendors
for
decades.
“Epic
controls
who
can
access
this
data,
when
they
can
access
it,
and
the
terms
by
which
they
can
access
it
—
despite
the
simple
fact
that
it
is
the
hospitals’
and
patients’
data,
not
Epic’s,”
the
lawsuit
reads.
Essentially,
Paxton
alleges
that
Epic
unlawfully
restricts
or
delays
providers’
access
to
patient
records
when
they
use
non-Epic
systems,
therefore
hindering
the
flow
of
critical
medical
information
and
potentially
postponing
care.
His
lawsuit
also
highlights
Epic’s
use
of
noncompete
agreements,
saying
that
these
limit
other
companies’
ability
to
hire
top
talent.
As
recently
as
2019,
these
agreements
prohibited
former
Epic
employees
from
working
for
thousands
of
healthcare
software
firms
during
their
noncompete
period,
according
to
the
complaint.
How
does
the
parent
angle
fit
into
this?
Paxton
sees
this
lawsuit
not
only
as
a
move
to
uphold
the
free
market,
but
also
as
a
continuation
of
his
efforts
to
protect
parents’
access
to
their
children’s
medical
records.
In
October,
his
office
settled
with
an
Austin-based
clinic
after
its
patient
record
system
allegedly
locked
parents
out
of
their
children’s
accounts
once
they
turned
12.
Paxton’s
office
is
claiming
that
Epic
hides
health
data
from
parents
once
the
child
turns
12,
saying
that
this
violates
Texas’
health
and
safety
code,
which
grants
parents
complete
and
unrestricted
access
to
their
children’s
medical
records.
Epic
has
responded
by
saying
it
does
not
determine
parental
access
to
children’s
records,
as
these
decisions
are
made
by
individual
health
systems
and
providers.
How
is
Epic
responding?
Epic
is
not
admitting
to
any
wrongdoing,
a
company
spokesperson
said
in
an
email
sent
to
MedCity
News.
“The
action
taken
by
Texas
is
flawed
and
misguided
by
its
failure
to
understand
both
Epic’s
business
model
and
position
in
the
market
and
the
enormous
contributions
our
company
has
made
to
our
nation’s
healthcare
system
illustrated
by
products
like
MyChart
—
software
that
tens
of
millions
of
Americans
depend
on
every
day,”
the
spokesperson
stated.
They
also
noted
that
Epic
facilitates
more
than
725
million
health
record
exchanges
each
month,
which
is
much
more
than
any
other
EHR
vendor.
Hasn’t
something
like
this
happened
before?
This
is
certainly
not
the
first
time
Epic
has
been
criticized
for
blocking
the
free
flow
of
health
data.
In
fact,
the
company
is
currently
embroiled
in
a
yearslong
legal
battle
with
data
platform
Particle
Health.
Following
months
of
dispute,
Particle
filed
an
antitrust
lawsuit
against
Epic
last
year,
alleging
that
the
company
wielded
its
dominant
market
stance
to
make
competition
impossible
in
the
payer
platform
space.
Epic
has
denied
wrongdoing
in
this
case
as
well
—
but
in
September,
a
federal
judge
advanced
the
lawsuit,
marking
the
first
time
antitrust
allegations
against
the
EHR
giant
have
gotten
this
far.
The
next
step
is
the
discovery
phase,
which
could
shed
new
light
on
how
data
sharing
rules
are
enforced.
Photo:
NiroDesign,
Getty
Images