C-SATS vs Proximie (2026)
Two products built around operating room video for different purposes. C-SATS assesses surgical performance, routing video to trained reviewers applying validated instruments so every score has a traceable basis, with the best privacy posture in this category and a recognised healthcare certification behind it. Proximie connects the room instead, letting a remote expert scrub in virtually to annotate and advise during a case, across more than five hundred hospitals in fifty countries. Training and proctoring against assessment and scoring. The question both should answer and neither does is what the surgeon is told: these recordings capture the team, and a score attached to a named individual can follow them into credentialing.
- Assessment rests on validated instruments applied by trained reviewers, so every score has a traceable basis rather than a model output.
- The protected health information posture is the best in this category and it needs to be, since the input is video from inside a patient.
- It is certified against a recognised healthcare control framework, stated plainly and repeatedly.
- Telepresence is the original capability and still the differentiator, letting a remote expert scrub in virtually, annotate the field and advise the operating surgeon.
- Reach spans more than five hundred hospitals across fifty countries, so a multinational group gets one platform.
- The compliance posture is stronger than the category norm and independently corroborated rather than self asserted.
This comparison is published by AI Health Index, an independent research platform that compares healthcare AI vendors objectively. C-SATS and Proximie are each graded against the same capability taxonomy, from each vendor's own public materials and the regulatory record, under the AI Health Index verification standard. No vendor pays for placement, and no vendor has reviewed this page. How this evidence is graded
Plain facts
| Fact | C-SATS | Proximie |
|---|---|---|
| Primary category | Workforce & Training | Health System AI Platforms |
| Founded | 2014 | 2016 |
| Headquarters | Seattle, Washington | Boston, Massachusetts |
| Website | csats.com | proximie.com |
Side by Side
Each record in one paragraph
Written to be quoted whole. Each paragraph states what the AI Health Index verified about the vendor, with the caveats attached. Generated from this pair’s live capability grades, so it moves when a grade moves.
The AI Health Index awards C-SATS its top capability grade on Autonomy and Oversight Model, AI Safety and PHI Stewardship and Security Certifications and Trust Center. Set against Proximie, C-SATS grades higher on several axes, including Autonomy and Oversight Model, Model and Technology Transparency and AI Safety and PHI Stewardship. Grades reflect evidence the AI Health Index could verify at the last review, so a low grade records disclosure the vendor has not published rather than a capability it has been shown to lack.
Source: AI Health Index, August 2026
The AI Health Index awards Proximie its top capability grade on Setting and Specialty Coverage. Set against C-SATS, Proximie grades higher on AI Centrality and Setting and Specialty Coverage. Its thinnest published disclosure sits on AI Liability and Recourse. Grades reflect evidence the AI Health Index could verify at the last review, so a low grade records disclosure the vendor has not published rather than a capability it has been shown to lack.
Source: AI Health Index, August 2026
Questions buyers ask
Should we choose C-SATS or Proximie?
On the axes where the AI Health Index separates them, C-SATS grades higher on several axes, including Autonomy and Oversight Model, Model and Technology Transparency and AI Safety and PHI Stewardship, and Proximie grades higher on AI Centrality and Setting and Specialty Coverage. C-SATS leads on the greater share of scored axes, but the split means the decision turns on which constraint is binding rather than on an overall winner.
Where do C-SATS and Proximie differ most?
The widest separation the AI Health Index records between C-SATS and Proximie is on AI Safety and PHI Stewardship, where C-SATS grades A and Proximie grades C. That axis sits in the AI Capability group, so it should carry the most weight for a buyer whose binding constraint is how much of the work the model itself is trusted to do.
Where do C-SATS and Proximie grade the same?
The AI Health Index grades C-SATS and Proximie the same on several axes, including Model Supply Chain Disclosure, Clinical and Operational Evidence and HIPAA and BAA Posture. Neither holds an advantage the index can evidence on those axes, so they should not carry weight in a selection between these two.
What have C-SATS and Proximie not disclosed?
At the last review, at least one of C-SATS and Proximie published thin or absent detail on AI Liability and Recourse. The AI Health Index treats an absent disclosure as a gap in the public record rather than a failure of the product, so these are the axes to get in writing during diligence instead of inferring from the grade.
Related comparisons
Other published head to head assessments involving these vendors or their closest peers. The full set for this category is on the Workforce & Training page.
Both capture the operating room including audio, where staff performance, error and interpersonal conduct are discussed openly, and neither publishes how that recording is governed for the individuals in the room. Assessment is the sharper version of the problem, since a score attached to a named surgeon can affect credentialing, and buyers should establish who sees case level results and whether they can be aggregated to a person. Neither publishes a rate, unit or charging mechanism, and neither publishes evidence that assessment scores predict patient outcomes rather than reviewer agreement.