Pulse
Winter 2017InactiveElectronic Medical Records for India
Pressure-test this opportunity
Explore the risks and possibilities with a prompt for ChatGPT, Claude, or your agent.
Electronic Medical Records for India
Explore the risks and possibilities with a prompt for ChatGPT, Claude, or your agent.
Pulse was the last form of DocTalk, a YC-backed Indian health-tech company founded in 2016. The first product let patients keep records and pay to message doctors they already knew. After raising $5 million, the company expanded across three cities, hired toward hospital sales, and eventually spun its electronic-record work into Pulse India.[5]
The company found a real clinical problem but attached it to two fragile behaviors: patients had to pay for follow-up messages, and doctors had to move work out of calls and WhatsApp into a new system. Venture funding financed geographic and organizational expansion before either behavior was proven durable. The late EMR pivot put the product closer to the clinic workflow, but it arrived after nearly 100 layoffs and a failed financing process.[6]
TechCircle reported that the health-tech operation shut in 2019 and returned remaining capital to investors.[7]
Image 1 / 1
Krishna Chaitanya “Chaitu” Aluru grew up around medicine because his father was a cardiologist in Hyderabad. YourStory reported that the elder Aluru received patient calls and messages around the clock, many of them routine follow-ups. Chaitu saw the same files, prescriptions, and questions moving through calls, email, and WhatsApp with no organized record.[4]
Chaitu started DocTalk in February 2016 with Akshat Goenka and Vamsee Chamakura. The three had previously worked on an AI assistant called Genie. Chaitu and Vamsee had known each other since middle school; Vamsee studied computer science at IIIT Hyderabad, Chaitu at Brown, and Akshat graduated from Wharton after working in investment banking.[3]
Their first idea was an on-demand marketplace for meeting a new doctor. Interviews changed the thesis. Chronic-care patients were reluctant to replace a trusted physician, while both sides struggled after the initial visit. Akshat wrote that “fear of unfamiliarity trumps frustration of impatience every single time when it comes to health.”[2] DocTalk became the follow-up layer for an existing relationship.
Akshat told YourStory: “We do not connect patients with new doctors, we just streamline the process post-consultation.” Patients could save reports, subscribe to a participating doctor, share files, and receive prescriptions. Doctors gained one queue for patient context and paid follow-up work.[4]
The team entered YC Fellowship and then Winter 2017. Chaitu described the ambition plainly: “We want to change how healthcare works in India.”[3] YC now lists Pulse as inactive and records a team size of 30, though contemporaneous layoff reporting shows the organization briefly grew much larger.[1]
DocTalk began as a paired set of patient and doctor applications. A patient uploaded reports, prescriptions, vital signs, and medication information, then connected to a doctor seen in person. The doctor could review that history, answer messages, issue a prescription, and track progress without another clinic appointment. The product verified the existing patient relationship and had no directory of unfamiliar doctors.
The company built separate patient and doctor apps for both iOS and Android plus a doctor web application. Chaitu said three engineers shipped that system in eight months using React Native, RxSwift, RxJava, AWS Lambda, and Google Cloud Functions.[3] That breadth let each user work on a familiar device, but it also created five interfaces to maintain before the company had a settled sales motion.
Distribution began inside the clinic. A participating doctor asked patients to install DocTalk after an appointment. YourStory reported that most acquisition came from those patient databases and that Razorpay enabled payment processing. The company claimed the product cut response and remote-consultation time by 25%, but no audited retention or cohort data survives.[4]
Pulse India reversed the center of gravity. Instead of treating the patient app as the system of record, it gave doctors an iPad tool for digital prescriptions and patient files. India had already published EHR standards in 2016, but those recommendations did not provide a national identity, consent manager, or live exchange network.[10] Every clinic still had to decide that a new EMR was worth changing its daily work.
The original user was a chronic-care patient who wanted access to an existing doctor between visits. The paying relationship was more complex: patients paid a monthly subscription, DocTalk retained a share, and the doctor received the balance. The company also charged doctors an initiation fee, according to shutdown reporting.[7]
Pulse narrowed the buyer to doctors and clinics that needed digital prescriptions and records. That was a cleaner organizational sale, but it competed for time inside the consultation itself.
DocTalk offered founder-reported evidence of demand. A defensible market size cannot be established. In May 2017, Chaitu said more than 5,000 people used the product and five of ten patients in participating clinics installed it.[3] By November, the company claimed 500 doctors and 30,000 patients. It did not disclose active subscriptions, message volume, retention, or revenue.[5]
The addressable infrastructure is different now. By December 2024, India's Ayushman Bharat Digital Mission had created 71.16 crore ABHA accounts and linked 45.99 crore records.[11] By May 2026, linked records passed 100 crore and more than 450 public and private health-tech systems had integrated.[12]
Practo and Lybrate owned doctor discovery, while Mfine and Doctor Insta competed in online consultation. DocTalk's insight was that discovery and follow-up were different markets. Existing relationships carried trust, but that advantage also gave doctors control over distribution.
WhatsApp was the practical incumbent. It cost patients nothing, already lived on both phones, and imposed no clinic onboarding. DocTalk offered structure, payment, and records, but only after both sides adopted another app. Pulse then entered the EMR category, where clinics bore migration and training costs while larger vendors could bundle scheduling, billing, records, and hospital workflows.
Patients paid monthly for access to their doctor. DocTalk kept part of the fee and paid the remainder to the doctor; doctors also paid an initiation fee.[3] The model aligned payment with follow-up access, but it asked a patient accustomed to informal messaging to fund a new workflow.
The $5 million round changed the operating plan. The company intended to hire across sales, operations, and engineering, deepen three cities, enter new ones, and onboard hospital chains.[5] No public revenue or burn figures allow a unit-economic calculation. Nearly 100 layoffs roughly one year later show that the funded structure outran the business it supported.
Pulse likely shifted revenue toward clinic software, but no pricing or adoption data was found. The failed $10 million financing removed the runway for a second go-to-market build.[6]
The company moved quickly from 5,000 founder-reported users in May 2017 to claimed coverage of 500 doctors and 30,000 patients that November. YourStory also recorded early claims of 100% weekly doctor and patient growth and 70% weekly revenue growth.[4] These numbers show early velocity but lack cohort definitions, audit, and retention.
An April 2018 hiring post confirms continued engineering expansion. By November, the company had laid off nearly 100 people and employed fewer than 40.[6] Headcount changed more decisively than the available customer evidence.
DocTalk raised $5 million in November 2017 to add cities, staff, and hospital chains. By November 2018, a larger proposed round had failed, the CEO had left, and nearly 100 employees were gone. People Matters quoted an unnamed company source saying, “It was a good time for the team to restructure some of the performing and non-performing people.”[6] The later shutdown report identifies this contraction as terminal.
Akshat framed the startup test as making “something people want strongly enough that they would pay for it.”[2] DocTalk had evidence that patients wanted easier follow-up. It had less public evidence that they would keep paying, or that doctors would move conversations into a new queue.
The doctor was the product's source of value, channel, and constrained resource. Each patient cohort required a participating clinician. Each clinician had to change a workflow already handled by staff, phone, paper, and WhatsApp. Adding cities multiplied onboarding work without removing that dependency. Hospital-chain sales introduced another buyer before the small-practice motion had disclosed retention.
Pulse India made the doctor-facing record the product. That attacked the right dependency because the clinical note and prescription begin with the provider. It also changed the sale from paid patient communication to workflow software. TechCircle quoted one person close to the company saying the transition “didn't yield the acceleration that it needed.”[7]
The remedy arrived after the organization had been built for faster consumer and geographic growth. EMR adoption required migration, training, support, and trust. A shrinking team and failed financing could not fund that second adoption curve. No named founder or investor published a failure quote, so the account relies on contemporaneous reporting and the operating sequence.
TechCircle reported that the company shut the health-tech concept, laid off most employees, and returned remaining capital. The founders reportedly explored reputation management afterward. A current LinkedIn shell carries similar language, but its linked domain does not resolve.[8] The original domain is now operated by Mighty Media LLC as a publishing site, not by the YC company.[14]
The strongest counterargument is timing. India had EHR standards in 2016, yet it lacked today's national identity, facility registry, consent exchange, and record network. The 2025 Digital Personal Data Protection Rules also made consent, purpose limitation, minimization, security, and accountability explicit operating duties.[13] Better rails would have reduced integration uncertainty. They would not have solved the original willingness-to-pay and clinic-workflow problems by themselves.