Executive Interview: Sarah Laird of Enjoin on Turning Hidden Revenue Gaps Into Measurable Financial Impact
At Patient Prism, we understand that revenue optimization spans the entire patient journey. As such, we’re thrilled to spotlight Enjoin, the top-rated physician-directed, technology-enabled revenue integrity platform in the U.S., with a 97% client retention rate and over $2 billion in revenue recovered for health systems.
Powered by advanced analytics and workflow-driven technology, Enjoin combines clinical expertise with scalable infrastructure to identify high-impact opportunities and drive measurable financial outcomes. We sat down with Sarah Laird, Senior Director of Staffing and Advisory at Enjoin, to explore how healthcare organizations can turn workflow gaps into measurable financial improvement.
Q: Many health systems and hospitals believe they’re losing revenue primarily due to patient acquisition challenges. What do you see as the hidden culprit?
A: While patient acquisition absolutely matters, the reality is that most health systems are losing substantial revenue on patients they’ve already treated. It’s not a lack of demand—it’s workflow gaps in clinical documentation precision, coding accuracy, and the ability to effectively manage denials.
We’ve recovered over $2 billion for health systems by identifying these small but pivotal moments: incomplete clinical documentation that doesn’t reflect the true complexity of care delivered; inaccurate coding that fails to capture quality indicators impacting value-based payments; and preventable or defensible claim denials driven by inefficient denial management workflows.
Q: How do you help revenue cycle teams identify these gaps when they don’t know what they’re missing?
A: Through trusted partnership, we’ve built real-time feedback loops that give clinical documentation improvement specialists, coders, and providers objective, accessible visibility into performance trends. Our physician-led pre-bill review process analyzes clinical documentation and coding outcomes before claims go out the door. We identify query opportunities and coding gaps for accurate reimbursement while there’s still time to act.
Teams improve faster when feedback is timely, specific, and tied to actual patient encounters—rather than abstract performance metrics. We consistently see meaningful improvements in coding accuracy within the first several months of a partnership as we strengthen physician engagement in clinical documentation. As our clients’ cross-functional teams gain clarity on where breakdowns are occurring, we partner together to course-correct immediately with a scalable solution.
Q: You mentioned pre-bill chart reviews. How are those different from traditional audits?
A: Pre-bill chart review happens before the claim is submitted, while traditional audits occur weeks or months after payment. By the time a retrospective audit identifies a problem, the financial impact—denied claims, underpayments, and rework—has already occurred.
Pre-bill review is proactive and preventive. Our clinical coding team and physician reviewers examine documentation and coding outcomes in real time, catching issues while they can still be corrected. This protects revenue before it’s lost and helps clinical teams learn from immediate, encounter-specific feedback rather than being told months later that something was documented incorrectly.
It’s the difference between preventing a fire and investigating the ashes.
Q: What’s the biggest misconception healthcare leaders have about revenue integrity?
A: That it’s solely one department’s problem. Revenue integrity starts at the point of care, with accurate clinical documentation and charging/coding practices. When documentation is incomplete or vague, even the best chargemasters, coders, and billers can’t fully recover that revenue.
Our physician-led model works because doctors understand clinical nuance in ways that traditional revenue cycle consultants often cannot. We speak the language of the clinicians creating the documentation, which means our feedback is implemented rather than ignored. Our experienced team of former CDI directors and coding leaders also connects the dots across daily workflows, helping drive more effective and sustainable process improvements.
Our 97% client retention rate reflects that approach—we’re not auditors pointing fingers; we’re clinical partners helping teams capture what they’ve already earned through education.
Q: What should healthcare organizations be measuring today that they’re probably not?
A: Most organizations track claim denials and collection rates, but they’re not consistently measuring documentation quality, physician documentation patterns, or pre-submission error rates. The revenue you’re losing lives in those unmeasured moments—often compounded by the labor costs associated with rework and correction.
Start by tracking how often clinical documentation requires clarification before coding, how many claims are “clean” on first submission, and which specialties or providers have the highest documentation gaps. For CDI programs specifically, this also means evolving KPIs beyond traditional query rates and response times for CC/MCC capture to include the impact of queries on severity capture and overall reimbursement outcomes.
These upstream metrics are leading indicators of downstream revenue performance. Build measurement systems that identify and address issues before claims leave your building—not after they’ve been rejected by payers.