Digital Health Workflow Automation
We do two things for digital health: build the integration layer that lets you land in an Epic or Cerner environment, and produce the compliance architecture that survives the review before it costs you a contract.
What breaks today
Integration is quoted in quarters
Every new health system customer wants a different integration path, and each one is treated as a bespoke project.
Security review stalls the deal
The technical questionnaire arrives, nobody owns it, and a signed deal slips a quarter while engineering writes documentation.
HIPAA was retrofitted
The product was built quickly and compliance was added later, which shows immediately under scrutiny.
Subprocessors are undocumented
PHI touches four vendors and nobody can produce the BAA chain on request.
What we build
Scoped during the assessment, then delivered in one to three week increments against your real systems.
A reusable integration layer
One FHIR and HL7 integration core with per-customer configuration, so the second health system takes weeks rather than a quarter.
SMART on FHIR and EHR marketplace readiness
Launch context, scopes, and authorization built to the pattern Epic and Oracle Health actually certify against.
Compliance architecture package
Data flow diagrams, PHI inventory, access control model, encryption posture, and subprocessor register, written as review-ready artifacts.
Audit logging and access controls
Access logging at the level an enterprise reviewer expects, with retention and review procedures documented.
Security questionnaire library
Maintained answers to the questionnaires you keep receiving, so the next review is a retrieval rather than a project.
What changes
Ranges reflect what comparable engagements have produced. Your baseline is measured during the assessment before anyone commits to a number.
- Second and third health system integrations delivered on a fraction of the first one’s timeline
- Enterprise security review answered from existing artifacts instead of blocking the deal
- A documented PHI inventory and BAA chain
- Architecture that scales without a compliance rewrite
Systems this touches
Integration channel is chosen on verified capability in your environment, not on what is easiest to document.
- FHIR R4
- SMART on FHIR
- HL7 v2
- Epic App Orchard / Vendor Services
- Oracle Health APIs
- Redox
- AWS and Google Cloud HIPAA-eligible services
Not sure this is the right workflow to start with? The $24,997 assessment exists to answer exactly that, and it frequently points somewhere other than where leadership expected.
Common Questions
We already have SOC 2. Is that enough?
SOC 2 helps and does not substitute. Health system reviewers ask HIPAA-specific questions about PHI flow, minimum necessary, BAA chain, and breach procedures that a SOC 2 report does not answer. We produce those artifacts alongside your existing report.
Should we build integration in-house or buy an interoperability vendor?
It depends on volume and control requirements, and we will give you a straight answer either way. For most companies below roughly ten health system customers, a vendor plus a thin owned layer beats building the whole thing.
Talk it through with an engineer.
Tell us what this workflow costs you today and we will tell you honestly whether automating it is worth the engagement.
Start with a conversation, not a proposal.
A 45-minute call with a senior engineer. We will tell you honestly whether automation is the right answer for the workflow you have in mind.