For EMS agencies & training programs

Improve EMS documentation before bad charts happen.

Realistic simulated scenarios and structured feedback that train medics to write cleaner narratives. No PHI, no compliance burden.

Register interestView example scenario
No PHI requiredLaunching soonBuilt from field experience
Scenario #SC-104 · Refusal of transport
Training mode
Provider narrativeEMT-B · Draft

Dispatched to a 64 y/o male, c/o chest pain. Pt. found seated on couch, A&Ox4. Pain onset reported approximately 30 minutes prior to arrival, described as pressure, non-radiating. Vitals on arrival within normal limits. Patient stated he did not want to go to the hospital. Advised of risks. Patient signed refusal. Cleared from scene at 14:32.

Automated feedbackLive
Missing
Missing: specific vital signs
“Within normal limits” isn’t documented vitals. Capture BP, HR, RR, SpO₂, and a pain scale value.
Risk
Risk: incomplete refusal documentation
Refusal is documented but capacity assessment, risks discussed, and next-step instructions aren’t.
Suggestion
Suggested addition
Note who was on scene with the patient and any contact made with medical control before clearing.
Synthetic scenarios · No real patient data3 issues found
The problem

Most charting errors aren’t caught until it’s too late.

By the time a chart fails QA review or a billing claim is denied, the call is over and the lesson is lost. Providers learn from feedback that arrives weeks late, if at all.

Compliance risk

Key elements are routinely missed

EMS narratives usually miss required elements
Capacity assessments, refusal risk discussions, and time stamps are the most common gaps.
Revenue impact

Incomplete charts drive denials

Transports are denied due to incomplete documentation
Missing medical necessity language and incomplete vitals are the top denial drivers.
Training gap

Almost no dedicated training exists

Providers get minimal documentation training
Most QA happens after the chart is filed: punitive, late, and inconsistent across shifts.
Recurring errors

The same errors keep repeating

QA reviews catch the same recurring issues
Without targeted training, the same providers keep making the same documentation mistakes.
How it works

A practice loop, not a punishment loop.

PCRU turns documentation into deliberate practice. Providers train on realistic calls, get structured feedback in seconds, and improve before the next shift.

Assign scenarioLibrary
SC-104Refusal: chest pain
Cardiac
SC-077Syncope: geriatric fall
Trauma
SC-122MVC: multi-patient triage
Trauma
SC-051Pediatric respiratory distress
Peds
What’s inside

Everything a training officer needs.
Nothing a medic has to fight.

Scenario-based training

A growing library of realistic EMS calls: cardiac, trauma, refusals, pediatrics, behavioral. Filter by skill level, agency standard, or weak spot.

Automated QA-style feedback

Narratives are reviewed for completeness, clarity, and compliance the moment they're submitted. Specific, structured, never punitive.

Missing documentation detection

Catches the elements that drive billing denials and audit findings: capacity, refusal language, medical necessity, time stamps.

Training recommendations

Each provider gets a personalized practice queue based on their actual patterns, not generic CE modules.

Agency-level insights

Track quality trends across crews, shifts, and call types. Identify which standards need reinforcement before audit season.

Synthetic by design

Every scenario is generated from clinical patterns, not real charts. No PHI, no HIPAA exposure, no compliance overhead.

Example feedback

See exactly what providers see.

A real chest-pain refusal narrative, the kind that gets billed as ALS-1 and audited a month later. Click a flag to see the issue and the suggested fix.

Fewer documentation gaps per chart
Stronger refusal and AMA documentation
More complete billing narratives
Less time spent on QA remediation
SC-104 · Chest pain refusal
Synthetic

Dispatched to a 64 y/o male, c/o chest pain. Pt. found seated on couch, A&Ox4. Pain onset reported approximately 30 minutes prior to arrival, described as pressure, non-radiating. Patient . Advised of risks. Patient signed refusal.

EMT-B · J. Rivera·14:32 · 213 chars·3 issues found
Missing

Missing: specific vital signs

Document BP, HR, RR, SpO₂, temperature, and a numeric pain scale. "Within normal limits" is not a documented vital sign.

Suggested addition
BP 138/86, HR 78, RR 16, SpO₂ 98% RA, pain 3/10.
Who it’s for

Built for the people who carry charts home.

Reduce billing denials and audit risk across every shift.

Standardize documentation quality across crews, identify recurring weak spots, and prove compliance with structured, evidence-backed training records.

  • Agency-wide quality dashboards by crew, shift, and call type
  • Audit-ready training documentation, exportable on demand
  • Higher first-pass billing approval, fewer rebills
Talk to us about ems agencies
EMS Agencies
Fewer billing denials, cleaner audits
Who built this

Built from years in the field.

PCRU was founded by people who’ve written the charts, run the calls, and built the software.

Kayvon Yazdan, MD

Kayvon Yazdan, MD

Physician, Firefighter

A physician with 5 years of hands-on Fire and EMS experience before medical school. Kayvon understands documentation from both the field and the receiving end.

Blake Nazario-Casey

Blake Nazario-Casey

Software Engineer, Firefighter

12 years of experience across fire, EMS, and emergency room work. Blake builds the tools he wished existed when he was writing charts between calls.

Coming soon

Be the first to know
when we launch.

Register your interest and we'll reach out when PCRU is ready for your agency or program.

Register interest
No PHI requiredEarly access for registered agenciesLaunching 2026