Hyro vs Infermedica
Hyro and Infermedica both compete in patient triage, but answer different questions. Hyro is our pick for call deflection at scale: 85%+ call deflection claim for high-volume health systems. Infermedica earns the clinically-validated triage engine slot: Class IIb medical device, 1:10 cost-savings ratio claim. The right choice depends on whether your priority is call deflection at scale or clinically-validated triage engine.
- Patient triage
- 02
- May 23, 2026
Infermedica
by Infermedica · founded 2012
Class IIb medical-device-grade triage engine + voice agent.
- Enterprise (quote).
- CE-MDR Class IIb / HIPAA
How Hyro and Infermedica compare
Pricing, compliance, and integrations sourced from vendor documentation. Verified May 23, 2026.
| Spec | Hyro | Infermedica |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Enterprise (quote). | Enterprise (quote). |
| Free tier | Yes | Yes |
| HIPAA | No / unverified | Yes |
| SOC 2 Type II | No / unverified | No / unverified |
| EHR integrations | Not specified | Not specified |
| Founded | — | 2012 |
| HQ | — | PL |
| Best for | Best for call deflection at scale | Best clinically-validated triage engine |
Scroll horizontally to see both columns.
When to pick each one
Best for call deflection at scale
85%+ call deflection claim for high-volume health systems.
- Healthcare-industry voice agent
- Strong enterprise traction in scheduling + access
Best clinically-validated triage engine
Class IIb medical device, 1:10 cost-savings ratio claim.
- Polish-origin, CE-MDR Class IIb
- Powers Symptomate and many B2B deployments
- Strongest evidence base
Open the full patient triage comparison
Symptom checkers, voice agents, intake automation, post-discharge messaging. Tools that reduce front-desk load, improve access, and route patients to the right care setting.
/best-ai-patient-triage