Healthplus Technologies

Name: Healthplus Technologies
Brand: Healthplus.ai

Healthplus Technologies develops PERISCOPE®, a clinical decision support system that predicts 7-day and 30-day post-operative infection risk from EHR data, surfaces contributing factors for explainability, and delivers risk scores within EHR workflows to inform perioperative clinical decision-making.

Est 2017|15 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 3K|Website|FTEs 17

01Competitive Landscape

| Aspect | Healthplus.ai PERISCOPE® | Epic (EHR + models) | NAVOY® (Algodx) | |--------|---------------------------|---------------------|----------------| | Starting Price | Not public (quote-based) | Not public (quote-based) | Not public (quote-based) | | Primary use case | EU hospitals seeking a CE-marked post-op infection risk prediction integrated into EHR workflows | Health systems standardized on Epic seeking native tooling and reduced third-party integrations | ICUs seeking sepsis prediction tooling (different clinical domain) | | Key Strength | CE marking under EU MDR for the indicated SaMD use, post-op infection focus, EHR-embedded workflow approach, ISO 27001 claimed | Deep EHR workflow integration and large enterprise footprint | Focus on ICU sepsis prediction; messaging emphasizes clinician workload concerns | | Key Weakness | Limited public third-party customer reviews; pricing opacity; dependency on integration quality | Public scrutiny of some predictive models and alert fatigue concerns | Not directly focused on post-op infection; validation and deployment fit should be confirmed | - Direct competitors and their key differentiators - PERISCOPE’s indicated differentiator is a specific clinical indication (postoperative infection risk) combined with stated EU MDR CE-mark status for that indication. - Alternatives are typically either broader EHR platform capabilities, infection surveillance tools, sepsis/ICU deterioration models, or internal analytics. - Feature comparison: where does this product excel vs lag behind? - Potential strengths: - Regulatory framing (EU MDR) for the stated clinical use - EHR-embedded workflow design - Potential limitations: - Narrower scope compared with large EHR vendors or multi-condition CDSS platforms - Limited public peer-review footprint on mainstream B2B review platforms - Pricing comparison: value proposition vs alternatives - Benchmarking is difficult due to lack of published pricing; comparisons often consider incremental license and integration costs versus internal development within an EHR vendor platform. - Customer testimonials comparing this product to competitors - Not found in accessible sources. - Market share and adoption trends - No objective market share data found. The vendor reports activity in several countries and pilots in other regions. - When customers choose competitors instead (and why) - Organizations may prefer Epic-native or internal build when they want to reduce third-party SaMD vendors, have constrained IT/security processes, or require multi-condition tooling rather than a focused point solution.

01Competitive Landscape

Aspect	Healthplus.ai PERISCOPE®	Epic (EHR + models)	NAVOY® (Algodx)
Starting Price	Not public (quote-based)	Not public (quote-based)	Not public (quote-based)
Primary use case	EU hospitals seeking a CE-marked post-op infection risk prediction integrated into EHR workflows	Health systems standardized on Epic seeking native tooling and reduced third-party integrations	ICUs seeking sepsis prediction tooling (different clinical domain)
Key Strength	CE marking under EU MDR for the indicated SaMD use, post-op infection focus, EHR-embedded workflow approach, ISO 27001 claimed	Deep EHR workflow integration and large enterprise footprint	Focus on ICU sepsis prediction; messaging emphasizes clinician workload concerns
Key Weakness	Limited public third-party customer reviews; pricing opacity; dependency on integration quality	Public scrutiny of some predictive models and alert fatigue concerns	Not directly focused on post-op infection; validation and deployment fit should be confirmed

Direct competitors and their key differentiators
- PERISCOPE’s indicated differentiator is a specific clinical indication (postoperative infection risk) combined with stated EU MDR CE-mark status for that indication.
- Alternatives are typically either broader EHR platform capabilities, infection surveillance tools, sepsis/ICU deterioration models, or internal analytics.
Feature comparison: where does this product excel vs lag behind?
- Potential strengths:
  - Regulatory framing (EU MDR) for the stated clinical use
  - EHR-embedded workflow design
- Potential limitations:
  - Narrower scope compared with large EHR vendors or multi-condition CDSS platforms
  - Limited public peer-review footprint on mainstream B2B review platforms
Pricing comparison: value proposition vs alternatives
- Benchmarking is difficult due to lack of published pricing; comparisons often consider incremental license and integration costs versus internal development within an EHR vendor platform.
Customer testimonials comparing this product to competitors
- Not found in accessible sources.
Market share and adoption trends
- No objective market share data found. The vendor reports activity in several countries and pilots in other regions.
When customers choose competitors instead (and why)
- Organizations may prefer Epic-native or internal build when they want to reduce third-party SaMD vendors, have constrained IT/security processes, or require multi-condition tooling rather than a focused point solution.

Aspect

Healthplus.ai PERISCOPE®

Epic (EHR + models)

NAVOY® (Algodx)

Starting Price

Not public (quote-based)

Primary use case

EU hospitals seeking a CE-marked post-op infection risk prediction integrated into EHR workflows

Health systems standardized on Epic seeking native tooling and reduced third-party integrations

ICUs seeking sepsis prediction tooling (different clinical domain)

Key Strength

CE marking under EU MDR for the indicated SaMD use, post-op infection focus, EHR-embedded workflow approach, ISO 27001 claimed

Deep EHR workflow integration and large enterprise footprint

Focus on ICU sepsis prediction; messaging emphasizes clinician workload concerns

Key Weakness

Limited public third-party customer reviews; pricing opacity; dependency on integration quality

Public scrutiny of some predictive models and alert fatigue concerns

Not directly focused on post-op infection; validation and deployment fit should be confirmed

Healthplus Technologies

01Competitive Landscape

02Market Map

01Competitive Landscape

02Market Map