A problem of Epic proportion

In the United States today, one private company holds the digital keys to the nation's health. Epic Systems provides the electronic health record for 42.3% of acute care hospitals and controls over half (54.9%) of all acute care hospital beds, a concentration of market power unprecedented in modern healthcare IT. This paper investigates how Epic transformed from a small, privately held vendor into the dominant force shaping the electronic health record landscape, drawing on peer-reviewed literature, federal antitrust filings, and cross-national case studies. We chart its ascent from a unified-platform niche player, to market validation through Kaiser Permanente's multi-billion-dollar rollout, to rapid adoption under the HITECH Act. Quantitative analysis shows the U.S. hospital electronic health record market shifting from competitive to highly concentrated (Herfindahl-Hirschman Index > 2,500) after 2018, with Epic capturing nearly 70% of new hospital contracts in 2024. We examine the reinforcing mechanisms and standard practices, including network effects that add true interoperability value, high switching costs common to enterprise software, bundling practices, and workforce restrictions, that entrench this dominance, alongside alleged anti-competitive behaviors under active litigation. While some consolidation reflects legitimate business efficiencies and the inherent complexity of healthcare IT, the current level of market concentration poses significant governance challenges. International deployment failures in Norway, Denmark, Finland, and the United Kingdom reveal that Epic's success reflects market structures rather than clear technological superiority. Regulatory contrasts highlight how the European Health Data Space's mandatory interoperability, portability, and pre-market testing requirements are designed to prevent similar monopolization in the EU. We conclude with a reform blueprint that spans antitrust enforcement, structural separation, public utility models, and clinician-driven redesign, arguing that electronic health record systems must be governed as essential public health infrastructure. Confronting Epic's monopoly is critical to restoring competition, fostering innovation, and ensuring that digital health serves patients and the public good.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
PLOS Digital Health
Published
2026-03-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0001143
Primary Topic
Electronic Health Records Systems
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A problem of Epic proportion

Mena Ramos, Matthew G. Crowson, Rawan Abulibdeh, Molly Douglas et al.
PLOS Digital Health
Electronic Health Records Systems
article

A problem of Epic proportion

Mena Ramos, Matthew G. Crowson, Rawan Abulibdeh, Molly Douglas, Leo Anthony Celi, Noelle N. Saillant
article en

Abstract

In the United States today, one private company holds the digital keys to the nation's health. Epic Systems provides the electronic health record for 42.3% of acute care hospitals and controls over half (54.9%) of all acute care hospital beds, a concentration of market power unprecedented in modern healthcare IT. This paper investigates how Epic transformed from a small, privately held vendor into the dominant force shaping the electronic health record landscape, drawing on peer-reviewed literature, federal antitrust filings, and cross-national case studies. We chart its ascent from a unified-platform niche player, to market validation through Kaiser Permanente's multi-billion-dollar rollout, to rapid adoption under the HITECH Act. Quantitative analysis shows the U.S. hospital electronic health record market shifting from competitive to highly concentrated (Herfindahl-Hirschman Index > 2,500) after 2018, with Epic capturing nearly 70% of new hospital contracts in 2024. We examine the reinforcing mechanisms and standard practices, including network effects that add true interoperability value, high switching costs common to enterprise software, bundling practices, and workforce restrictions, that entrench this dominance, alongside alleged anti-competitive behaviors under active litigation. While some consolidation reflects legitimate business efficiencies and the inherent complexity of healthcare IT, the current level of market concentration poses significant governance challenges. International deployment failures in Norway, Denmark, Finland, and the United Kingdom reveal that Epic's success reflects market structures rather than clear technological superiority. Regulatory contrasts highlight how the European Health Data Space's mandatory interoperability, portability, and pre-market testing requirements are designed to prevent similar monopolization in the EU. We conclude with a reform blueprint that spans antitrust enforcement, structural separation, public utility models, and clinician-driven redesign, arguing that electronic health record systems must be governed as essential public health infrastructure. Confronting Epic's monopoly is critical to restoring competition, fostering innovation, and ensuring that digital health serves patients and the public good.

PLOS Digital HealthVol. 5(3)
Industry, innovation and infrastructure
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Electronic Health Records Systems
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.