RadiusDocs turns your chart, outside records, and handwritten notes into payer-ready medical-necessity letters, denial appeals, IME drafts, and PI narratives — each one citation-backed to the exact page and line. Built for the clinics already doing prior-auth, work-comp, IME, and personal-injury work.
Conservative care history, failed therapies, objective findings — all cited.
We've watched too many clinics evaluate us as the wrong kind of software. Let's get that out of the way.
Keep your charting workflow exactly as it is. RadiusDocs sits downstream of the record — we don't capture encounter notes.
We don't listen to your visits. We work on the records after they exist: outside provider files, imaging, your notes, handwritten pages.
We don't submit claims or chase payments. We assemble the medical narrative that supports your auth, appeal, or PI report.
Each one is sourced from public clinician threads, payer policies, and AMA / AHRQ data. We didn't invent these.
Assembling conservative-care history, prior failed treatments, supporting diagnoses, and objective findings from scattered records — for every PA, every appeal, every payer rule change.
Chiropractors and pain specialists doing PI work describe writing reports on weekends, prepping for depositions cold, and re-reading the same chart story across multiple systems to coordinate with attorneys.
Denials for ESIs, MBBs, facet injections, and bundled chiropractic claims hinge on specific clinical support: VAS scores, conservative-care timelines, response to prior treatment. Most clinics rebuild that from memory under deadline.
Pain and PI workflows depend on outside records — imaging, ER visits, prior treaters, work-comp notes. They arrive late, incomplete, duplicated, or scanned sideways. Manually catching what's missing is brutal.
Public quotes from pain physicians, chiropractors, and APPs working in PI-adjacent settings.
I'm tired of doing reports on the weekend and having my associate docs overwhelmed with documentation.
Our prior authorization department is sending cases back to us … because we don't have a before-and-after VAS score.
We've already seen lawyers get reprimanded for passing off bogus citations hallucinated by AI.
Neither. CaseOS sits downstream of the record — it doesn't capture encounter notes or listen to visits. Keep your EMR and charting workflow exactly as they are.
Yes. It assembles conservative-care history, prior failed therapies, objective findings, and before/after VAS scores — each mapped to the payer criterion and cited to the chart.
No. CaseOS doesn't submit claims or chase payments. It builds the cited clinical support behind your auth or appeal — you keep the argument.
Yes — PDFs, scans, images, and handwritten notes, including the multi-provider record sets that arrive out of order.
One 15-minute demo with a real human. We'll look at a recent record you actually struggled with and show you exactly what RadiusDocs would produce.
Start Your Free Trial