Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2025
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	6. Commitments and Contingencies Litigation On August 29, 2024, a purported stockholder class action lawsuit (the Porcelli Complaint), Porcelli, et al. v. Outset Medical, Inc., et al., 5:24-cv-06124-EJD, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, naming the Company, its Chief Executive Officer, and Chief Financial Officer as defendants. On October 18, 2024, a second purported stockholder class action lawsuit (the Plymouth Complaint), Plymouth County Retirement Association v. Outset Medical, Inc, et al., 5:24-cv-06124-HSG, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The second lawsuit additionally names the Company's former Chief Financial Officer as a defendant. The Porcelli Complaint alleges that between August 1, 2022 and August 7, 2024, the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (Exchange Act) by making false or misleading statements about the Company’s business, operations and prospects related to the sale and marketing of the Tablo Hemodialysis System and TabloCart with Prefiltration, including concerning the impact of certain FDA processes for these products on the Company’s revenue growth. The Plymouth Complaint alleges the same violations between September 15, 2020 and August 7, 2024. On March 18, 2025, the court issued an order relating and consolidating the Porcelli Complaint and the Plymouth Complaint, appointing the lead plaintiff, and approving lead plaintiff’s choice of counsel. On April 17, 2025, the court entered an order on the parties’ stipulated case schedule. Lead plaintiff must file an amended complaint by June 6, 2025 and defendants must respond by August 14, 2025, with additional briefing to follow. On November 29, 2024, an Outset stockholder purporting to act on behalf of the Company filed an action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against current and former members of Outset’s Board of Directors and certain of its officers (Derivative Defendants), alleging that the Derivative Defendants breached their fiduciary duties to the Company in connection with the same alleged events and alleged materially false and misleading statements asserted in the class actions described above. The complaint also alleges, in connection with those alleged events, a series of claims for unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and waste of corporate assets. On March 25, 2025, the court entered an order staying the derivative action pending a resolution on any motion to dismiss in the above-described class action. A substantively duplicative action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on April 28, 2025, additionally alleging a claim for misappropriation of material, non-public information against certain of the Derivative Defendants. The complaints seek unspecified monetary damages and other relief. The cases are at a very early stage and the Company cannot currently estimate the loss or the range of possible losses it may experience in connection with this litigation. In addition, from time to time, the Company may become involved in other legal proceedings or investigations, which could have an adverse impact on its reputation, business and financial condition and divert the attention of the Company’s management from the operation of the Company’s business. Indemnification In the ordinary course of business, the Company often includes standard indemnification provisions in its arrangements with its partners, customers and suppliers. Pursuant to these provisions, the Company may be obligated to indemnify such parties for losses or claims suffered or incurred in connection with its service, breach of representations or covenants, intellectual property infringement or other claims made against such parties. These provisions may limit the time within which an indemnification claim can be made. It is not possible to determine the maximum potential amount under these indemnification obligations due to the limited history of prior indemnification claims and the unique facts and circumstances involved in each particular agreement. To date, the Company has not incurred any material costs as a result of such indemnification obligations and has not accrued any liabilities related to such obligations in these financial statements.

Commitments and Contingencies

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2025

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

6. Commitments and Contingencies

Litigation

On August 29, 2024, a purported stockholder class action lawsuit (the Porcelli Complaint), Porcelli, et al. v. Outset Medical, Inc., et al., 5:24-cv-06124-EJD, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, naming the Company, its Chief Executive Officer, and Chief Financial Officer as defendants. On October 18, 2024, a second purported stockholder class action lawsuit (the Plymouth Complaint), Plymouth County Retirement Association v. Outset Medical, Inc, et al., 5:24-cv-06124-HSG, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The second lawsuit additionally names the Company's former Chief Financial Officer as a defendant. The Porcelli Complaint alleges that between August 1, 2022 and August 7, 2024, the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (Exchange Act) by making false or misleading statements about the Company’s business, operations and prospects related to the sale and marketing of the Tablo Hemodialysis System and TabloCart with Prefiltration, including concerning the impact of certain FDA processes for these products on the Company’s revenue growth. The Plymouth Complaint alleges the same violations between September 15, 2020 and August 7, 2024. On March 18, 2025, the court issued an order relating and consolidating the Porcelli Complaint and the Plymouth Complaint, appointing the lead plaintiff, and approving lead plaintiff’s choice of counsel. On April 17, 2025, the court entered an order on the parties’ stipulated case schedule. Lead plaintiff must file an amended complaint by June 6, 2025 and defendants must respond by August 14, 2025, with additional briefing to follow.

On November 29, 2024, an Outset stockholder purporting to act on behalf of the Company filed an action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against current and former members of Outset’s Board of Directors and certain of its officers (Derivative Defendants), alleging that the Derivative Defendants breached their fiduciary duties to the Company in connection with the same alleged events and alleged materially false and misleading statements asserted in the class actions described above. The complaint also alleges, in connection with those alleged events, a series of claims for unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and waste of corporate assets. On March 25, 2025, the court entered an order staying the derivative action pending a resolution on any motion to dismiss in the above-described class action. A substantively duplicative action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on April 28, 2025, additionally alleging a claim for misappropriation of material, non-public information against certain of the Derivative Defendants. The complaints seek unspecified monetary damages and other relief.

The cases are at a very early stage and the Company cannot currently estimate the loss or the range of possible losses it may experience in connection with this litigation.

In addition, from time to time, the Company may become involved in other legal proceedings or investigations, which could have an adverse impact on its reputation, business and financial condition and divert the attention of the Company’s management from the operation of the Company’s business.

Indemnification

In the ordinary course of business, the Company often includes standard indemnification provisions in its arrangements with its partners, customers and suppliers. Pursuant to these provisions, the Company may be obligated to indemnify such parties for losses or claims suffered or incurred in connection with its service, breach of representations or covenants, intellectual property infringement or other claims made against such parties. These provisions may limit the time within which an indemnification claim can be made. It is not possible to determine the maximum potential amount under these indemnification obligations due to the limited history of prior indemnification claims and the unique facts and circumstances involved in each particular agreement. To date, the Company has not incurred any material costs as a result of such indemnification obligations and has not accrued any liabilities related to such obligations in these financial statements.