What Krasyn Does Not Do
Every EMR vendor publishes what their software can do. This is the other list.
If you have bought an EMR before, you already know the problem with vendor websites: everything is a checkmark. You find out what the software actually does in month three of implementation, when it is too late and too expensive to change your mind.
We built an internal system to stop ourselves doing that. Every public claim about Krasyn has to carry evidence — the code that implements it, the automated tests that keep it working, and a review status. A build step recomputes which claims are allowed to be published and fails our release if our own marketing copy exceeds it. Right now that system permits 6 claims and withholds 6.
This page is generated from that same file. It is not written by our marketing team alongside the enforcement mechanism — it is written by it. When a claim changes, this page changes or the build breaks.
Things we do not have
If one of these is essential to your practice, Krasyn is the wrong choice today. We would rather you find that out on this page than in month three.
We could have claimed
Biopsy and pathology results flow back into the chart with an acknowledgment lifecycle.
What is actually true
Biopsy status is tracked in the chart — planned, collected, pathology pending, result reviewed — with a next-review date and a recorded pathology summary the clinician enters. Krasyn does NOT integrate with a pathology laboratory: there is no automated specimen feed and no result comes back electronically. Say 'track biopsy status', never 'pathology integration'. The automated clinical rubric has reviewed this content and found no blocking defect; that is not a licensed clinician's attestation, which tier 3 requires.
We could have claimed
Clinical photography and dermoscopy image capture with side-by-side comparison.
What is actually true
Dermatology note templates include a dermoscopy findings prompt for narrative documentation. Krasyn has no image capture, image storage, or image comparison capability for dermatology. The automated clinical rubric has reviewed this content and found no blocking defect; that is not a licensed clinician's attestation, which tier 3 requires.
We could have claimed
AI-assisted lesion assessment.
What is actually true
PROHIBITED. Krasyn has no dermatologic diagnostic or lesion-assessment capability of any kind, and any such capability would be a regulated device claim requiring FDA review. Do not publish a softened version of this claim. The automated clinical rubric has reviewed this content and found no blocking defect; that is not a licensed clinician's attestation, which tier 3 requires.
We could have claimed
Krasyn integrates with ECG devices, echo reporting systems, insulin pumps, CGMs, state immunization registries, and point-of-care lab analyzers.
What is actually true
Krasyn supports ORDERING these studies and REVIEWING their results once filed to the chart. It has no device, registry, or analyzer connection: no ECG device feed, no echo reporting-system link, no insulin-pump or CGM data feed, no IIS submission, and no point-of-care analyzer interface. Say 'ordering and result review', never 'integration'.
Things we will not claim yet
These are different. The work may exist, but the outside review that would let us say it publicly does not — so we do not say it. Feature existence is not evidence of superiority, and a claim about clinical capability needs more than an engineer being satisfied with it.
We could have claimed
The best-in-class dermatology EMR.
Why we are not saying it
Built for outpatient dermatology workflows. 'Best-in-class' stays a target, not a claim, until comparative research against named competitors, clinical review, claims review, security/privacy review, usability evidence from real dermatology users, and production verification are ALL complete. Feature existence is not evidence of superiority. The automated clinical rubric has reviewed this content and found no blocking defect; that is not a licensed clinician's attestation, which tier 3 requires.
We could have claimed
PHQ-9, GAD-7, AUDIT-C, Columbia, ASCVD, ORT and SOAPP screening instruments are built into the product.
Why we are not saying it
Built-in screening instruments are available in the care-plan and chart-summary surfaces. Describe them as built-in instruments, not as an integration with an external scoring service.
What we do claim, and why you can check it
Each of these passed the same gate: implementation, automated tests that keep it working, and a review appropriate to the claim.
- Krasyn ships dermatology note templates: a focused skin-visit SOAP scaffold and a problem-oriented template for tracking multiple skin problems.
- Dermatology practices capture Fitzpatrick skin type and primary skin concern as structured fields at registration, and see them on the patient's dermatology chart view.
- A dermatology practice opens the chart and the note already shaped for dermatology — derm surfaces lead the tab strip and new progress notes open with skin exam, procedure/specimen, and follow-up-interval sections.
- Track a lesion across visits with body location, morphology, size, biopsy status, treatment response, and a next-review date.
- A dermatology clinic can be demonstrated end to end on a seeded dermatology organization with a realistic patient panel.
- Dermatology practices get derm procedure and diagnosis codes in the box — biopsy, destruction, excision, repair — with a starting fee schedule.
Use this against every vendor you evaluate
You do not have to take our word for any of this. Ask every EMR vendor on your shortlist — including us — the same four questions:
- Which of the capabilities on your website are live today, and which are roadmap? Show me where your site says which is which.
- For your three headline claims, what is the evidence? Not a demo — the test or the reference customer.
- What does your product not do that competitors do? Name three.
- What would make you tell me not to buy your software?
A vendor who cannot answer the third and fourth questions is not being modest.
If none of the gaps above are dealbreakers for your practice, the rest of the product is worth twenty minutes of your time.
Ready to Leave Your Legacy EMR Behind?
See how Krasyn reduces documentation friction and helps surface missed billing opportunities for review.