Abridge holds a clear lead as the primary recommendation for ambient clinical note generation, particularly for auto-populating structured notes directly into major hospital records systems. Suki serves as the primary alternative, frequently highlighted when practices need an ambient assistant that spans a wide variety of systems to draft notes and manage administrative tasks.
The top-rated medical AI scribes are categorized by their specific strengths:
Nuance DAX Copilot — Best for Large Health Systems & Enterprise
Why it shines: Backed by Microsoft and built on the legacy of Dragon speech recognition. It offers the deepest native integration with major enterprise EHRs like Epic, Oracle Health (Cerner), and MEDITECH.
Expensive and less optimized for independent, solo, or small-group practices.[]()
We use an EHR system. Who offers an ambient listening integration that auto-populates SOAP notes?
Summary
Abridge is the usual answer when clinics ask to automatically populate SOAP notes directly into their existing records software. Suki is regularly paired alongside it for its ability to integrate across multiple major platforms.
Other topics in HIPAA-Compliant AI Medical Scribes
Abridge — Best for Hospital Networks & Verifiable AI
Why it shines: A major enterprise competitor to DAX. It stands out for its auditable "evidence links"—clicking on a part of the generated clinical note plays back the exact audio snippet from the patient visit where that information was discussed, making verification simple.[](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/best-ai-clinical-notes-5-tools-compared-2026-trytwofold-jyj0f)
Why it shines: Offers a robust free tier, making it the most accessible entry point for solo practitioners who want to test out ambient AI medical scribing without an immediate software contract.[](https://www.trytwofold.com/blog/best-ai-for-clinical-notes)
Suki AI — Best for Voice Commands & Ambient Flexibility
Yes. These are usually called ambient AI medical scribes: they listen to the physician–patient encounter, turn the conversation into a structured clinical note, and send a draft back to the EHR for physician review.
My top pick: Abridge
If you asked me to choose one best overall product in 2026, I would pick Abridge.
Excellent clinical-note quality: Abridge is specifically built around clinical conversations rather than simply transcribing audio.
Very strong EHR integration, particularly with Epic. Its system can incorporate patient context and previous encounters into the documentation.
Strong enterprise track record: Abridge says it is deployed across 300+ health systems and 40+ specialties.
Linked Evidence: one of its particularly useful features lets the physician trace generated documentation back to the underlying conversation, which is valuable for catching hallucinations or omissions.
Independent validation: Abridge was ranked #1 Best in KLAS for Ambient AI in 2025 and again in 2026. The 2026 recognition was based on interviews with healthcare organizations using the products.
It supports outpatient, inpatient and emergency workflows and 28+ languages.
The shortlist I'd actually evaluate
Product
My take
Best for
Abridge
🥇 Best overall
Hospitals, larger practices, Epic users
Suki
🥈 Best alternative
Physicians wanting an interactive AI assistant
Microsoft Dragon Copilot / DAX
🥉 Excellent
Suki is particularly compelling. It goes beyond passive transcription: it can generate notes, accept voice commands, perform dictation, help with coding, and provide clinical Q&A. It has deep integrations with Epic, Oracle Health, athenahealth and MEDITECH and supports 100+ specialties.
Nabla is another one I'd take very seriously, especially for a smaller organization. It supports 55+ specialties, 35+ languages, structured note export, and multiple EHR integration approaches. It also says audio isn't stored by default and that customer data isn't used to train its models.
Microsoft Dragon Copilot (the evolution of Dragon Medical/DAX) is particularly attractive if your organization already uses Dragon Medical One and Microsoft's healthcare ecosystem. It captures multi-party conversations and generates specialty-specific structured documentation.
One important caveat
I wouldn't choose based solely on vendor demos.
A 2026 randomized clinical trial comparing DAX and Nabla found that both improved physicians' experience and ability to engage with patients, but physicians still rated the generated notes only around neutral when asked whether they were as good as their own notes. Occasional inaccuracies, omissions and speaker-attribution errors occurred.
And an independent 2026 VHA evaluation of 11 AI scribes found that AI-generated notes were, on average, inferior to human-generated notes across several documentation-quality dimensions.
So the physician should always review and sign the note. The goal is dramatically reducing documentation work—not eliminating clinical responsibility.
What I'd recommend by situation
If you're a physician in an Epic health system:
→ Abridge would be my first trial.
If you're a physician in a smaller/private practice:
→ I'd compare Suki vs. Nabla, because workflow flexibility and contract/pricing structure become more important.
If you're already a heavy Dragon Medical user:
→ Dragon Copilot/DAX deserves serious consideration.
If you're buying for an entire hospital system:
→ I'd put Abridge, DAX, Suki and Ambience through a controlled pilot using your actual specialties and EHR workflows.
If you tell me your specialty (e.g., primary care, cardiology, psychiatry, orthopedics), EHR (Epic, Athena, eClinicalWorks, etc.), and whether you're an individual physician or buying for a practice, I can narrow this down to the best 2–3 choices and compare their current pricing, HIPAA/BAA terms, EHR integration, and note quality.
Rather than generic note generators, these platforms use specialty-trained models or customizable templates that adapt to the distinct terminology, diagnostic criteria, and formatting needs of surgical, medical, and diagnostic sub-specialties.
Top solutions capable of direct EHR integration include:
If you share which specific EHR you use (e.g., Epic, Athena, eClinicalWorks) and your ambulatory sub-specialty , I can give you a more tailored breakdown of how well these tools handle your specific charting requirements.
Yes. There are several ambient AI scribing platforms designed for specialty care that can generate structured SOAP notes and write them into an EHR, rather than leaving you with a transcript to copy and paste.
The key distinction is true EHR write-back versus simple note generation. Some products populate discrete fields in the patient's chart, while others generate a note that you still have to paste or import. For an ambulatory subspecialty practice, I'd prioritize specialty-specific documentation, access to relevant chart history, and a workflow that lets you review and sign the note without leaving your EHR.
Shortlist: ambient AI scribes for ambulatory subspecialties
1. DeepScribe
(Strong specialty-care candidate)
Designed for specialty-specific notes, including oncology, cardiology, gastroenterology, urology, orthopedics and neurology. Its Epic integration supports bidirectional data exchange, chart-context retrieval and structured note write-back.
Casual Conversation Filtering: Large language models (LLMs) used in medical scribes are prompted or fine-tuned to recognize conversational boundaries. They separate clinical dialogue (history of present illness, symptoms, treatment plans) from small talk (weather, sports, personal pleasantries), omitting the latter from the final SOAP/chart note.[](https://www.assemblyai.com/blog/ambient-ai-scribe)
Note: Always review a vendor’s explicit BAA (Business Associate Agreement) and trust center documentation, as enterprise or hospital-customized tiers can sometimes override default consumer/solo retention settings.[](https://www.palm-er.com/blog/what-does-your-ai-scribe-save)
Eleos Health: Tailored heavily for behavioral health and outpatient care, session audio is typically purged automatically within a brief window (1–2 minutes) post-session, while filtering out non-clinical context.[](https://aihealthindex.io/categories/ambient-scribes)
JotPsych: Geared toward mental health and clinical notes, it explicitly notes that audio is deleted immediately after transcription and does not retain raw voice files.[](https://aihealthindex.io/vendors)
palmER: Built with a strict privacy-first architecture, it specifies that it never stores ambient audio, and associated temporary data/transcripts are automatically wiped within 24 hours.[](https://www.palm-er.com/blog/what-does-your-ai-scribe-save)
Would you like to explore how these tools integrate with a specific EHR system (like Epic, Cerner, or Athenahealth) or narrow down options based on your medical specialty?
The best fit for your requirements is an ambient clinical AI scribe that filters out small talk when generating the medical note and deletes the raw audio after processing.
These are two separate capabilities: a tool can omit casual conversation from the final note while still retaining the audio or transcript temporarily. I would evaluate both independently, especially if you document sensitive patient encounters.
Best candidates to investigate
1. Heidi Health — strongest overall match to investigate
(Best starting point)
Heidi says it converts conversational speech into polished clinical notes, removes filler, and does not retain audio recordings after transcription. You can configure how long transcripts and notes are retained.
Casual conversation: Filler is removed; filtering all nonclinical small talk is not explicitly guaranteed in the sources I reviewed.
Organizations already invested in Microsoft/Dragon
Nabla
⭐ Excellent
Practices prioritizing flexibility, privacy and multi-EHR support
Ambience Healthcare
⭐ Excellent
Large organizations wanting documentation + broader workflow automation
Best for: Practices needing configurable notes that reflect complex subspecialty visits.
Supports more than 55 specialties and can export structured notes into EHR templates. Its Nabla Connect integration can launch from an EHR encounter, transfer patient context and send the reviewed note back. Actual integration depth depends on your EHR configuration.
Best for: Multispecialty ambulatory groups looking for a flexible integration model.
Supports 100+ specialties, customizable notes and direct syncing into relevant EHR sections. Its deeper integrations include Epic, Oracle Health, athenahealth and MEDITECH, with additional functions such as problem-based charting and order staging.
Best for: Physicians who want ambient scribing plus voice editing, dictation and broader workflow automation.
Focuses on enterprise-grade documentation integrated into clinical workflows, including Epic. Its Epic workflow lets clinicians capture conversations in Haiku and review AI-generated notes in Hyperspace, with linked evidence supporting verification.
Best for: Health systems and specialty groups already standardized on Epic.
Supports specialty-specific documentation outputs and a range of clinical specialties. The important caveat is deployment: Microsoft's standalone app requires manual transfer into the EHR, whereas an embedded EHR integration can deliver notes directly into the chart.
Best for: Organizations already using Dragon Medical or evaluating Microsoft-integrated clinical workflows.
Its ambient documentation capability explicitly supports numerous subspecialties, including allergy/immunology, dermatology, gastroenterology, rheumatology, ophthalmology, nephrology and urology. The unified SDK is designed to let EHR vendors and developers embed documentation into existing workflows, so this is a different implementation model from simply subscribing to a turnkey scribe app.
Best for: Health systems or technology teams seeking an embeddable ambient documentation platform.
A vendor saying “EHR integration” does not necessarily mean the product will populate your specific SOAP fields. During a demo, ask the vendor to demonstrate your actual workflow:
S — Subjective: HPI, ROS, relevant history and patient-reported symptoms.
O — Objective: Exam findings, vitals and relevant test results, with a clear distinction between observed and reported information.
A — Assessment: Problem-specific diagnoses and clinical reasoning.
P — Plan: Treatment, medication changes, testing and follow-up.
Also verify whether it can retrieve prior notes and relevant results, map the content into your actual note template, save an unsigned draft for clinician review, and avoid silently placing AI-generated information into inappropriate structured fields.
The vendor's security documentation, business associate agreement (BAA), retention policies, patient-consent workflow and integration costs should be part of the evaluation, too.
My recommendation
I'd start by evaluating DeepScribe, Nabla and Suki, then compare them against the ambient documentation capability already available in your EHR. These are the most relevant starting points for a subspecialty practice based on their published specialty support and integration capabilities.
One detail will narrow this down considerably:
Which EHR do you use, and what is your subspecialty? For example, Epic + rheumatology, athenahealth + cardiology, or eClinicalWorks + dermatology.
With those two details, I can narrow the shortlist to products that are most likely to push structured notes directly into your actual ambulatory workflow, rather than merely generating text for copy-and-paste.
Audio retention: No audio recordings saved, according to its published policy.
Website:
2. Nabla Copilot — strongest alternative for privacy-conscious practices
Nabla states that audio is not stored by default and that clinical notes have a configurable retention period, with a 14-day default described in its documentation. It generates structured clinical notes from patient encounters.
Casual conversation: It summarizes encounters, but I could not verify a specific guarantee that all casual conversation is excluded.
Audio retention: No audio stored by default; optional feedback sharing may involve de-identified audio.
Website:
3. Suki — worth considering for EHR integration
Suki provides ambient clinical documentation and supports integration with major EHRs. Its published security information says recordings are stored in encrypted cloud infrastructure, rather than on local devices.
Casual conversation: Produces structured clinical notes, but I couldn't verify a guarantee that small talk is automatically excluded.
Audio retention: Recordings are stored, so it does not meet a strict no-audio-retention requirement based on the public information reviewed.
Website:
What I'd verify before choosing
The most important distinction is between excluding casual conversation from the note and never retaining the audio. Ask vendors these four questions in writing:
Does the AI omit greetings, scheduling chatter, unrelated conversations, and other nonclinical speech from the generated note automatically?
Is raw audio deleted immediately after transcription, including temporary files, backups, and subprocessors?
Are transcripts retained? If so, for how long, and can they be automatically deleted?
Is patient data excluded from model training, and will the vendor sign a HIPAA Business Associate Agreement (BAA)?
A published privacy policy is a useful starting point, but confirm the terms for your specific subscription and configuration.
One useful reference: Penn Medicine describes its ambient documentation implementation as filtering out small talk, while noting that recordings are retained temporarily before deletion. That demonstrates why note filtering and audio retention need to be evaluated separately.
My recommendation: Start by evaluating Heidi and Nabla. Heidi's description most directly addresses conversational cleanup alongside no audio retention; Nabla provides particularly clear documentation of its default audio and data-retention policies. Neither should be assumed to guarantee complete small-talk exclusion without confirmation.
