LuxSci

What You Need To Know About Email Deliverability

MailHippo HIPAA compliant

Email deliverability refers to the ability of emails to reach recipients’ inboxes successfully without being filtered into spam folders or blocked entirely by email service providers. This metric encompasses the entire journey an email takes from sender to recipient, including authentication protocols, sender reputation, content quality, and recipient engagement patterns. For healthcare organizations managing patient communications, provider networks, and supplier relationships, understanding email deliverability becomes particularly important given the sensitive nature of healthcare data and the need for reliable communication channels. Healthcare providers, payers, and suppliers who master email deliverability can maintain better patient relationships, reduce administrative costs, and avoid compliance issues that arise from failed communications.

How Email Service Providers Evaluate Messages

Email service providers use algorithms to evaluate incoming messages and determine their appropriate destination within recipient email systems. These systems analyze multiple factors simultaneously, including sender authentication records, message content, sending patterns, and recipient behavior. The filtering process occurs in real-time, with providers like Gmail, Outlook, and Yahoo applying machine learning models trained on billions of email interactions to identify potential spam or malicious content.

Authentication plays a large role in this filtering process through verification of sender identity. Providers verify sender identity through SPF (Sender Policy Framework), DKIM (DomainKeys Identified Mail), and DMARC (Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance) records. Healthcare organizations without properly configured authentication often find their appointment reminders, lab results, or billing communications relegated to spam folders, disrupting patient care workflows and administrative processes.

Content analysis represents another layer of filtering, where providers examine subject lines, message body text, and embedded links for spam indicators. Healthcare communications containing medical terminology, prescription information, or insurance details may trigger false positives if not properly formatted or if sent from domains with poor reputation scores. The complexity of these filtering systems means that even legitimate healthcare communications can face delivery challenges without proper optimization.

Recipient engagement metrics influence future email deliverability for healthcare organizations, as providers track open rates, click-through rates, and spam complaint rates. When patients consistently ignore or delete emails from healthcare organizations, providers may begin filtering future messages more aggressively. This creates a feedback loop where poor engagement leads to worse delivery rates, making it increasingly difficult to reach patients with important medical information.

Sender Reputation and Healthcare Communications

Sender reputation functions as a digital credit score for email domains and IP addresses, influencing whether healthcare organizations can reliably reach patients, providers, and business partners. Email service providers maintain reputation databases that track sending behavior, bounce rates, spam complaints, and recipient engagement over time. A single domain or IP address with poor reputation can affect email deliverability across an entire healthcare network, creating widespread communication problems.

Healthcare organizations face unique reputation challenges due to the nature of their communications and patient populations. Patient appointment reminders sent to outdated email addresses generate high bounce rates, while automated billing notifications may receive spam complaints from recipients who forgot they subscribed to such communications. These factors can gradually erode sender reputation, making it increasingly difficult to reach patients with time-sensitive medical information or coordinate care between providers.

The healthcare industry’s regulatory environment adds complexity to reputation management, as organizations must balance effective communication with privacy requirements. HIPAA compliance considerations may limit how organizations can personalize emails or track recipient behavior, potentially affecting engagement metrics that influence sender reputation. Healthcare organizations tackle these constraints while maintaining the communication effectiveness needed for patient care and business operations.

Reputation recovery in healthcare settings requires sustained effort and careful monitoring of multiple factors. Organizations must implement proper list hygiene practices, authenticate their domains correctly, and monitor feedback loops from major email providers. The process can take weeks or months, during which patient communications may continue experiencing delivery issues that could impact care coordination and administrative efficiency. Proactive reputation management helps prevent these problems before they affect patient care.

Authentication Protocols for Healthcare Email Security

Modern email deliverability depends heavily on proper implementation of authentication protocols that verify sender identity and prevent email spoofing attempts. SPF records specify which mail servers are authorized to send emails on behalf of a domain, while DKIM adds cryptographic signatures to verify message integrity. DMARC ties these protocols together by instructing receiving servers how to handle emails that fail authentication checks, providing policy guidance for email providers.

Healthcare organizations must configure these protocols carefully to avoid authentication failures that could block legitimate patient communications. A misconfigured SPF record might prevent appointment confirmation emails from reaching patients, while improper DKIM setup could cause lab result notifications to be filtered as spam. These authentication failures can have serious implications for patient care, particularly when dealing with urgent medical communications or time-sensitive treatment instructions.

The implementation process requires coordination between IT teams, email service providers, and third-party healthcare applications that send email on behalf of the organization. Many healthcare systems use multiple platforms for patient communications, billing, and administrative functions, each requiring proper authentication configuration to maintain good email deliverability across all communication channels. This complexity makes authentication management an important component of healthcare IT operations.

Regular monitoring and maintenance of authentication protocols helps ensure continued email deliverability for healthcare organizations. DNS records can change unexpectedly, third-party applications may modify their sending practices, and email providers periodically update their authentication requirements. Healthcare organizations benefit from establishing procedures for ongoing authentication monitoring and having technical expertise available to address configuration issues quickly when they arise.

Content Quality and Compliance Considerations

Email content quality directly affects deliverability, with providers using advanced algorithms to evaluate message structure, language patterns, and formatting for spam indicators. Healthcare organizations must balance informative content with delivery requirements, ensuring that medical communications reach their intended recipients without triggering spam filters. This balance is challenging when dealing with complex medical terminology, prescription information, or insurance-related content that may resemble spam to automated filtering systems.

HIPAA compliance adds another layer of complexity to healthcare email content, as organizations must protect patient information while maintaining effective communication channels. Emails containing protected health information require additional security measures and careful content formatting to avoid both compliance violations and deliverability issues. The challenge is in creating compliant, informative communications that also pass through increasingly sophisticated spam filters without compromising patient privacy or care quality.

Subject line optimization also plays a role in healthcare email deliverability, as providers analyze these elements for spam indicators and patient engagement patterns. Generic subject lines like “Appointment Reminder” or “Lab Results Available” may perform differently across various email providers, requiring healthcare organizations to test and optimize their messaging strategies while maintaining compliance with healthcare communication regulations. Personalization can improve engagement but must be balanced with privacy requirements and spam filter sensitivities.

Message formatting and design elements influence both deliverability and patient engagement with healthcare communications. HTML emails with excessive images, complex layouts, or suspicious formatting may trigger spam filters, while plain text messages may not engage recipients effectively. Healthcare organizations must find the right balance between visual appeal and delivery reliability, often requiring testing across multiple email clients and providers to ensure consistent performance.

List Management and Patient Engagement Strategies

Effective list management forms the foundation of sustainable email deliverability for healthcare organizations managing communications with patients, providers, and suppliers. Clean, engaged recipient lists generate better delivery rates and help maintain positive sender reputation over time. Healthcare organizations must implement systematic approaches to list hygiene, including regular removal of bounced email addresses, management of unsubscribe requests, and monitoring of engagement patterns across different communication types.

Patient engagement patterns in healthcare differ significantly from typical marketing communications, as medical emails often contain information that recipients need rather than want. Appointment reminders, lab results, and billing notifications serve functional purposes that may not generate traditional engagement metrics like high open rates or click-through rates. Understanding these patterns helps healthcare organizations optimize their sending strategies without compromising the informational value of their communications or patient care quality.

Segmentation strategies in healthcare email deliverability focus on communication types and recipient preferences rather than demographic targeting approaches. Patients may engage differently with preventive care reminders compared to urgent test results, requiring sending approaches that consider both deliverability factors and patient communication preferences. This segmentation helps maintain good sender reputation while ensuring that different types of healthcare communications reach their intended recipients effectively.

Data quality management includes verification of patient contact information, preference management, and communication history tracking. Healthcare organizations benefit from implementing processes to capture updated email addresses during patient visits, verify contact information through multiple channels, and maintain records of communication preferences that respect patient choices while supporting care coordination needs. These practices improve both deliverability and patient satisfaction with healthcare communications.

Maintaining Email Deliverability Performance

Monitoring of email deliverability metrics provides healthcare organizations with the data needed to identify and address communication issues before they impact patient care or administrative operations. Key metrics include delivery rates, bounce rates, spam complaint rates, and inbox placement percentages across different email providers. These metrics help organizations understand how their communications perform across various platforms and identify potential problems with specific communication types or recipient segments.

Healthcare organizations should establish monitoring systems that track deliverability performance across different communication channels, including patient portal notifications, appointment reminders, billing communications, and provider-to-provider messages. This approach helps identify patterns that might indicate authentication issues, content problems, or reputation concerns that could affect the organization’s ability to communicate effectively with patients and business partners. Regular analysis of these patterns enables proactive problem-solving and continuous improvement.

Deliverability testing and optimization require ongoing attention to changing email provider policies, spam filter updates, and evolving patient communication preferences. Healthcare organizations benefit from implementing A/B testing for subject lines, send times, and content formats while maintaining compliance with healthcare regulations. Testing should include evaluation of deliverability performance across different email clients, devices, and providers to ensure consistent communication effectiveness.

Regular deliverability audits should include testing of authentication protocols, review of sender reputation scores, analysis of content performance, and evaluation of list management practices. These audits help healthcare organizations maintain optimal email deliverability while ensuring that their communication strategies remain aligned with both technical requirements and healthcare industry best practices for patient communication and data protection. Documentation of audit results and remediation activities shows commitment to maintaining reliable patient communications and regulatory compliance.

Picture of Erik Kangas

Erik Kangas

With 30 years engaged in to both academic research and software architecture, Erik Kangas is the founder and Chief Technology Officer of LuxSci, playing a core role in building the company into the market leader for HIPAA compliant, secure healthcare communications solutions that it is today. An international lecturer on messaging security, Erik also advises and consults on email technology strategies and best practices, secure architectures, and HIPAA compliance. Erik holds undergraduate degrees in physics and mathematics from Case Western Reserve University, and a doctoral degree in computational biophysics from MIT. Erik Kangas — LinkedIn

Get in touch

Find The Best Solution For Your Organization

Talk To An Expert & Get A Quote




A member of our staff will reach out to you

Get Your Free E-Book!

LuxSci High Email Deliverability Best Practices Paper

What you’ll learn:

Related Posts

HIPAA Compliant Email

New HIPAA Security Rule Makes Email Encryption Mandatory—Act Now!

The 2026 Deadline Is Closer Than You Think

The upcoming HIPAA Security Rule overhaul is expected to finalize by mid-2026, and it’s shaping up to be one of the most significant updates in years. Healthcare organizations that fail to prepare, especially when it comes to email security, will face immediate compliance gaps the moment enforcement begins.

Mid-2026 may sound distant, but for healthcare IT and compliance leaders, it’s right around the corner. Regulatory change at this scale doesn’t happen overnight, it requires planning, vendor evaluation, implementation, and internal alignment.

This isn’t a gradual shift. It’s a hard requirement.

Encryption Is About to Become Mandatory

For years, HIPAA has treated encryption as “addressable,” giving organizations flexibility in how they protect sensitive data. That flexibility is disappearing.

Under the updated rule, encryption, particularly for email containing protected health information (PHI), is expected to become a required safeguard.

That means:

  • Encryption must be automatic and standard for email, not optional
  • Policies must be enforced consistently
  • Email security can’t depend on human behavior

If your current system relies on users to manually trigger encryption, it’s already out of step with where compliance is heading. If you’re not encrypting your emails at all, then now is the time to re-evaluate and rest your technology and policies.

Email Is the Weakest Link in Healthcare Security

Email remains the most widely used communication tool in healthcare—and the most common source of data exposure. Every day, sensitive information flows through inboxes, including patient records, lab results, billing details, plan renewals and appointment reminders. Yet many organizations still depend on:

  • Basic TLS encryption that only works under certain conditions
  • Manual processes that leave room for human error
  • Limited visibility into email activity and risk

It only takes one mistake, such as a missed encryption trigger or a misaddressed email, to create a reportable breach. Regulators are well aware of this. That’s why email is a primary focus of the upcoming HIPAA Security Rule changes.

The Cost of Waiting Is Higher Than You Think

Delaying action may feel easier in the short term, but it significantly increases risk. Once the new rule is finalized, organizations without compliant systems may face:

  • Immediate audit failures
  • Regulatory penalties
  • Expensive, rushed remediation efforts
  • Or worst of all, an email security breach

Beyond financial consequences, there’s also reputational harm. Patients expect their data to be protected. A single incident can immediately erode trust and damage your brand beyond repair.

Waiting until the end of 2026 also means that you’ll be competing with every other organization trying to fix the same problem at the same time, driving up costs and limiting vendor availability.

Most Email Solutions Won’t Meet the New Standard

Here’s the uncomfortable reality: many existing email platforms won’t be enough, especially those that are not HIPAA compliant. Common gaps include:

  • Encryption that isn’t automatic or policy-driven
  • Lack of Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
  • Insufficient audit logging for compliance reporting
  • Lack of Zero Trust security principles

On top of that, vendors without alignment to HITRUST certification and Zero-Trust architectures may struggle to demonstrate the level of assurance regulators will expect moving forward.

If your current solution wasn’t designed specifically for healthcare and HIPAA compliance, it’s likely not ready for what’s coming.

LuxSci Secure Email: Built for What’s Next

This is where a purpose-built solution makes all the difference. LuxSci HIPAA compliant email is designed specifically for healthcare organizations navigating the latest compliance requirements, not just today, but in the future regulatory landscape.

LuxSci delivers:

  • Automatic, policy-based encryption that removes user guesswork
  • Advanced DLP controls to prevent PHI exposure before it happens
  • Comprehensive audit logs to support audits and investigations
  • Zero Trust architecture that verifies every user and action

Additionally, LuxSci is HITRUST-certified, helping organizations demonstrate a mature and defensible security posture as regulations tighten. Email data protection isn’t about patching gaps, it’s about eliminating them.

Act Now or Pay Later

If there’s one takeaway, it’s this: the time to act is now. Start by asking a few direct questions:

  • Is our email encryption automatic and enforced?
  • Do we have full visibility into email activity and risk?
  • Is our vendor equipped for evolving HIPAA requirements?

If the answer to any of these is unclear, now’s the time to take action. Organizations that move early will have time to implement the right solution, train their teams, and validate compliance. Those that wait will be forced into reactive decisions under pressure.

Conclusion: The Time to Act is Now!

The HIPAA Security Rule overhaul is coming fast, and it’s raising expectations across the board. Encryption will no longer be addressable, but rather mandatory. As a result, email security can no longer be overlooked, and compliance will no longer tolerate gaps.

LuxSci HIPAA compliant email provides a clear, future-ready path for your organization, combining automated encryption, DLP, auditability, and Zero Trust security in one solution.

The real question isn’t whether change is coming. It’s whether your organization will be ready when it does.

Reach out today. We can look at your existing set up, help you identify the gaps, and show you how LuxSci can help!

FAQs

1. When will the updated HIPAA Security Rule take effect?
The changes to the HIPAA Security Rule are expected to be finalized and announced around mid-2026, with enforcement likely soon after, by the end of the year.

2. Will email encryption truly be mandatory?
Yes, current direction strongly indicates encryption will become a required safeguard, which could start later this year or in early 2027.

3. Is TLS encryption enough for compliance?
No. TLS alone does not provide sufficient, guaranteed protection for PHI.

4. Why is HITRUST important in this context?
HITRUST certification demonstrates a vendor’s strong alignment with healthcare security standards and will likely carry more weight with regulators.

5. How does LuxSci help organizations prepare?
HITRUST-certified LuxSci offers secure email with automated encryption, DLP, audit logs, and Zero Trust architecture, helping organizations meet evolving compliance demands.

LuxSci G2 2026

LuxSci Earns 19 G2 Spring 2026 Badges

LuxSci continues its strong performance in the G2 Spring 2026 Reports, earning 19 badges that reflect real customer satisfaction and consistent product excellence across multiple areas, including email encryption, HIPAA compliant messaging, email security and email gateways.

G2: A Highly Reputable Peer Review Platformn

In a crowded software landscape, it’s easy for bold claims to blur together. That’s where G2 stands apart. Its rankings are based entirely on verified user feedback, giving buyers a clearer picture of how solutions actually perform in day-to-day use, not just how they’re marketed.

For Spring 2026, LuxSci earned recognition across multiple categories, including Leader, Best Customer Support, and Best ROI. Together, these awards show that LuxSci delivers leading technology and a best-in-class customer experience.

What the Badges Represent

Each G2 badge reflects direct input from customers using LuxSci in real-world environments. These evaluations cover usability, onboarding, support responsiveness, and long-term value. LuxSci’s Spring 2026 badges span leadership, customer satisfaction, ROI, and ease of implementation, demonstrating consistent strength across the full customer lifecycle.

Leader Badge: Market Leadership Validated

The Leader badge is awarded to companies with high customer satisfaction and strong market presence. LuxSci’s placement reflects reliable performance, strong security, and continued trust from organizations operating in highly regulated environments like healthcare.

Best Customer Support: A Standout Strength

In secure healthcare communications, timely and accurate support is essential. Issues must be resolved quickly to avoid operational or compliance risks. Customers consistently highlight LuxSci’s fast response times, deep expertise, and a hands-on approach, showing that our technology and our people deliver meaningful, real-world solutions.

Best ROI: Proven Business Value

ROI includes reduced compliance risk, improved efficiency, and scalable operations, not just cost. Customers report measurable benefits from LuxSci’s reliability, built-in compliance, and streamlined workflows, leading to strong long-term value and a solution that keeps you ahead of security and compliance risks.

What This Means for LuxSci Customers

These awards show LuxSci’s ability to serve organizations of varying sizes, from mid-market to enterprise. All reviews are from verified users, ensuring authenticity and transparency. Customers consistently mention reliability, security, and responsive support, along with overall peace of mind. The recognitions validate LuxSci’s ability to deliver secure, dependable communication solutions backed by strong support, including HIPAA compliant email, marketing and forms.

LuxSci’s 10 G2 Spring 2026 badges—including Leader, Best Customer Support, and Best ROI—demonstrate consistent excellence across performance, usability, and customer satisfaction. These results reinforce its position as a trusted provider in secure communications.

LuxSci MFA

Traditional MFA No Longer Qualifies as “Reasonable” Security

For years, multi-factor authentication (MFA) was considered one of the most effective ways to protect sensitive systems. By requiring a second verification step, such as a text message code or push notification, organizations could significantly reduce the risk of compromised passwords.

But the threat landscape has changed.

Today, attackers routinely bypass traditional MFA using techniques such as MFA evasion, token replay attacks, and consent phishing. These methods are no longer rare or highly sophisticated. They are widely used, automated, and increasingly effective.

As a result, regulators, auditors, and security frameworks are raising expectations for authentication security. For healthcare organizations in particular, traditional MFA alone may no longer satisfy the HIPAA requirement to implement “reasonable and appropriate safeguards.”

In the near future, email systems that rely only on basic MFA, without conditional access or phishing-resistant authentication, may increasingly be viewed as security gaps during risk assessments.

Why Traditional MFA Is No Longer Enough

Traditional MFA still improves security compared to passwords alone. However, many common MFA methods were designed before today’s phishing techniques and cloud authentication attacks became widespread.

Common MFA methods include:

  • SMS verification codes
  • Email-based authentication codes
  • Push notifications to mobile apps

While these mechanisms add friction for attackers, they can still be intercepted or manipulated during sophisticated phishing attacks. Because modern attackers now target authentication workflows directly, organizations relying solely on traditional MFA may be more vulnerable than they realize.

How Attackers Bypass MFA Today

Cybercriminals increasingly rely on tools that capture credentials and authentication tokens during login sessions. Three attack techniques are now especially common.

  • MFA Evasion and Phishing Proxies – Attackers frequently deploy adversary-in-the-middle phishing kits that sit between the user and the real login service. When users enter their credentials and MFA code on a phishing page, the attacker forwards the information to the legitimate site and captures the authentication session. The user successfully logs in—but the attacker gains access as well. If attackers capture those tokens, they can reuse them to access the account directly.
  • Token Replay Attacks – After successful authentication, systems typically issue session tokens that allow users to remain logged in without repeated MFA prompts. This technique has been widely observed in attacks targeting cloud email platforms such as Microsoft 365, allowing attackers to access email data even when MFA is enabled.
  • Consent Phishing – Consent phishing bypasses MFA entirely. Instead of stealing passwords, attackers trick users into granting permissions to malicious applications that request access to their mailbox or files. If users approve the request, the attacker’s application receives persistent access to the account through APIs—often without triggering security alerts.

Why Email Authentication Matters Most in Healthcare

Email remains one of the most critical systems in healthcare organizations. It supports patient communication, internal collaboration, and the exchange of sensitive information. Unfortunately, it is also the most frequently targeted entry point for cyberattacks.

Once attackers gain access to an email account, they can:

  • Impersonate healthcare staff
  • Launch internal phishing attacks
  • Access sensitive patient communications
  • Extract protected health information (PHI)

Because of this, email authentication controls are becoming a major focus for security teams and compliance auditors alike.

Evolving Regulatory Expectations

HIPAA does not prescribe specific technologies, but it requires organizations to implement safeguards that are “reasonable and appropriate” based on risk. As new attack methods emerge, the definition of reasonable security evolves.

Today, many security frameworks and regulatory bodies are emphasizing stronger identity protections, including:

  • Phishing-resistant authentication
  • Conditional access policies
  • Monitoring for suspicious login behavior
  • Controls for third-party application permissions

Organizations that rely solely on basic MFA may increasingly struggle to demonstrate that their authentication protections are sufficient.

The Shift Toward Phishing-Resistant Authentication

To address the weaknesses of traditional MFA, many organizations are adopting phishing-resistant authentication technologies, which can be enabled with tools like Duo and Okta. These solutions rely on cryptographic authentication tied to trusted devices, which prevents attackers from capturing or replaying login credentials.

Examples include:

  • Hardware security keys
  • Passkeys
  • Certificate-based authentication

Because authentication is tied to both the device and the legitimate website domain, these technologies significantly reduce the success rate of phishing attacks.

Why Conditional Access Is Becoming Essential

Conditional access adds another layer of protection by evaluating context and risk before granting access. Instead of treating every login the same, conditional access policies analyze signals such as:

  • Device security status
  • Geographic location
  • Network reputation
  • User behavior patterns

If something appears unusual, such as a login from a new country, the system can require stronger authentication or block the attempt altogether. This risk-based approach to authentication helps prevent many account compromise scenarios.

The Future of HIPAA Risk Assessments

As authentication threats evolve, healthcare security assessments are increasingly focusing on identity protection maturity. Organizations may begin seeing findings related to:

  • Weak or outdated MFA methods
  • Lack of conditional access policies
  • Insufficient monitoring of login activity
  • Unrestricted third-party application permissions

In particular, email systems without advanced authentication protections may be flagged as high-risk vulnerabilities, especially when PHI is accessible.

LuxSci’s Modern Approach to MFA

Modern threats require more than a simple second login factor. LuxSci approaches authentication security with layered identity protection designed specifically for healthcare environments.

Instead of relying solely on basic MFA methods like SMS codes or email verification, LuxSci supports stronger authentication controls and policies that align with evolving security expectations. These protections can include:

  • Strong multi-factor authentication options
  • Monitoring for unusual login behavior
  • Enhanced identity verification mechanisms

By combining multiple security layers within its HIPAA-compliant secure communications email and marketing solutions, LuxSci helps healthcare organizations protect sensitive email communications while maintaining usability for providers, health plan administrators, payment providers, and patient engagement teams.

Conclusion

Multi-factor authentication remains an important security control—but not all MFA is created equal. Attack techniques such as phishing proxies, token replay, and consent phishing have demonstrated that traditional MFA methods can be bypassed. As a result, regulators and auditors are increasingly expecting stronger identity protections.

For healthcare organizations that rely heavily on email communications, the implications are significant. Weak authentication controls can expose sensitive patient data and may soon appear as high-risk findings during HIPAA risk assessments. The organizations best positioned for the future will be those that modernize authentication strategies now, moving toward phishing-resistant methods, conditional access policies, and layered identity protection.

Reach out to LuxSci today to learn how HIPAA compliant email can support both your organization’s engagement and cybersecurity needs.


FAQs

1. What is traditional MFA?

Traditional MFA refers to authentication methods that require a second verification step, typically SMS codes, email codes, or push notifications.

2. Why can attackers bypass MFA today?

Modern phishing tools can intercept authentication sessions or steal login tokens, allowing attackers to access accounts even when MFA is enabled.

3. What is phishing-resistant authentication?

Phishing-resistant authentication uses cryptographic methods tied to trusted devices, preventing attackers from capturing login credentials.

4. Why is email security especially important for healthcare organizations?

Email systems often contain patient communications and sensitive information, making them a common target for cyberattacks.

5. How can organizations improve authentication security?

Organizations can strengthen identity security by adopting phishing-resistant authentication methods, implementing conditional access policies, and monitoring login activity.

LuxSci Automated Email Encryption

Encryption Optional Email Will Fail Audits in 2026 and Beyond

For years, healthcare organizations have relied on click-to-encrypt email workflows and secure portals as a practical compromise between usability and compliance. Or in some cases, they simply thought most of their emails did not need to be compliant. In regulated industries where data security and privacy are paramount, this approach was still considered “good enough.”

That era is ending.

As we progress into 2026 and beyond, regulators, auditors, and cyber insurers are sending a clear and consistent message: encryption that depends on human choice is no longer acceptable. It’s already happening. Encryption optional email isn’t merely raising concerns, it’s failing audits outright.

An Email Threat Landscape That’s Changing Faster Than Email Habits

Historically, email encryption was treated as a best practice rather than a hard requirement. If an organization could demonstrate that encryption tools existed and that employees had access to them, auditors were often satisfied. The box was checked, everybody moved on.

Today, the questions auditors ask are fundamentally different. Instead of asking whether encryption is available, they are asking whether sensitive data can ever leave the organization unencrypted. If the answer is yes, even in rare cases, or even accidentally, that’s no longer viewed as an acceptable gap. It’s viewed as inadequate control.

Why 2026 Is a Tipping Point for Email Security

Several forces are converging here in 2026 that make optional encryption increasingly untenable. Regulatory scrutiny around PHI and PII exposure continues to intensify. Breach costs and litigation are rising, with email remaining one of the most common vectors for data exposure and breaches. AI is also changing the game for cybercriminals, and attacks will continue to increase and be more sophisticated. As a result, cyber insurers are tightening underwriting requirements and demanding stronger, more predictable controls.

At the same time, email user behavior is unpredictable and inconsistent, which is a non-starter for data security in today’s world.

Taken together, these trends and behaviors point to a single requirement: email security controls must be automated. They must be enforced by systems, not dependent on employee memory, judgment, or good intentions.

The Reality of “Encryption Optional” in Practice

On paper, optional encryption can sound reasonable. In practice, it creates gaps large enough to open you up to a breach.

Secure portals are a good example. They require recipients to click a link, authenticate, and access content in a controlled environment. While this protects data in transit, and is a better approach than no security at all, it also introduces friction. And people don’t like friction. Senders forget to use the portal. Recipients ask for “just a quick email instead.” Shortcuts are taken to save time. And every shortcut becomes a risk.

Click-to-encrypt systems suffer from a similar problem. They rely on users to correctly identify sensitive data and remember to take action. But people often misclassify information, forget to click the button, or assume someone else has already secured the message. From an auditor’s perspective, this isn’t a training failure. It’s a set-up and control failure.

Email Security Defaults Are the New Normal

The latest message from regulators, auditors, and insurers is clear. If encryption is optional, data vulnerabilities become inevitable.

What can you do?

Below is a quick email security checklist to help you get started. Cyber insurers may require or recommend the following safeguards during the underwriting process, such as:

  • Multi-factor authentication (MFA)
  • Endpoint protection
  • Encrypted backups
  • Incident response planning
  • Encryption protocols for sensitive data in transit and at rest, including PHI in emails

In 2026 and beyond, healthcare organizations and regulated industries will be judged not by what they allow, but by what they prevent. Automated, encrypted email is the new. normal.

Want to learn more about LuxSci HIPAA compliant email? Reach out today.

You Might Also Like

encrypted email transmission

Is the Email Encrypted? How to Tell if an Email is Transmitted Using TLS

SMTP TLS encryption is popular because it provides adequate data protection without creating a complicated user experience for email recipients. Sometimes, though, the experience is too seamless, and recipients may wonder if the message was protected at all.

Luckily, there is a way to tell if an email was encrypted using TLS. To see if a message was sent securely, we can look at the raw headers of the email. However, it requires some knowledge and experience to understand the text. It is actually easier to tell if a recipient’s server supports TLS than to tell if a particular message was securely transmitted.

To analyze a message for transmission security, we will look at an example email message sent from Hotmail to LuxSci. We will explain what to look for when decoding the message headers and how to tell if the email was transmitted using TLS encryption.

An Example Email Message

First, we must understand how an email message typically travels through several machines on its way from the sender to the recipient. Roughly speaking:

  1. The sender’s computer talks to the sender’s email or WebMail server to upload the message.
  2. The sender’s email or WebMail server then talks to the recipient’s inbound email server and transmits the message to them.
  3. Finally, the recipient downloads the message from their email server.

It is step 2 that people are most concerned about when trying to understand if their email message is transmitted securely. They usually assume or check that everything is secure and OK at the two ends. Indeed, most users who need to can take steps to ensure that they are using SSL-enabled WebMail or POP/IMAP/SMTP/Exchange services so that steps 1 and 3 are secure. The intermediate step, where the email is transmitted between two different providers, is where messages may be sent insecurely.

To determine if the message was transmitted securely between the sender’s and recipient’s servers (over TLS), we need to extract the “Received” header lines from the received email message. If you look at the source of the email message, the lines at the top start with “Received.” Let’s look at an example message from a Hotmail user below. The email addresses, IPs, and other information are obviously fake.

LuxSci:

The Outlook email was sent to a LuxSci user. The Received headers appear in reverse chronological order, starting with the server that touched the message last. Therefore, in this example, we see the LuxSci servers first.

Received: from abc.luxsci.com ([1.1.1.1])
	by def.luxsci.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r7JEfLgH003867
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT)
	for <user-xyz@def.luxsci.com>; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 10:41:21 -0400
Received: from abc.luxsci.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by abc.luxsci.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r7JEfK0Z030182
	for <user-xyz@def.luxsci.com>; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:41:20 -0500
Received: (from mail@localhost)
	by abc.luxsci.com (8.14.4/8.13.8/Submit) id r7JEfKXD030178
	for user-xyz@def.luxsci.com; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:41:20 -0500
Received: from dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com (dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com [2.2.2.2])
	by abc.luxsci.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r7JEfIkK030002
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT)
	for <someone@luxsci.net>; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:41:19 -0500

Proofpoint:

LuxSci uses an email filtering service, Proofpoint. Messages reach Proofpoint’s servers before being delivered to LuxSci. Here’s what their servers report about the email transmission:

Received: from unknown [65.54.190.216] (EHLO bay0-omc4-s14.bay0.hotmail.com)
	by dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com.ppe-hosted.com
        (envelope-from <someone@hotmail.com>);
	Mon, 19 Aug 2019 08:41:18 -0600 (MDT)

Outlook:

And finally, here’s what we see from Oultook’s server.

Received: from BAY403-EAS373 ([65.54.190.199]) by bay0-omc4-s14.bay0.outlook.com
       with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); 
       Mon, 19 Aug 2019 07:41:19 -0700

How to Use Received Message Headers to Tell if the Email is Encrypted

The message headers contain information that can help us determine if an email is encrypted. Here are a few helpful notes to help you decode the text:

  1. We said this above, but the message headers appear in reverse chronological order. The first one listed shows the last server that touched the message; the last one is the first server that touched it (typically the sending server).
  2. Each Received line documents what a server did and when.
  3. There are three sets of servers involved in this example: one machine at Hotmail, one machine at Proofpoint, where our Premium Email Filtering takes place, and some machines at LuxSci, where final acceptance of the message and subsequent delivery happened.

Presumably, the processing of email within each provider is secure. The place to be concerned about is the hand-offs between Hotmail and Proofpoint and between Proofpoint and LuxSci, as these are the big hops across the internet between providers.

In the line where LuxSci accepts the message from Proofpoint, we see:

(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT)

This section, typical of most email servers running “sendmail” with TLS support, indicates that the message was encrypted during transport with TLS using 256-bit AES encryption. (“Verify=not” means that LuxSci did not ask Proofpoint for a second SSL client certificate to verify itself, as that is not usually needed or required for SMTP TLS to work correctly). Also, “TLSv1/SSLv3” is a tag that means that “Some version of SSL or TLS was used;” it does not mean that it was SSL v3 or TLS v1.0. It could have been TLS v1.2 or TLS v1.3.

So, the hop between Proofpoint and LuxSci was locked down and secure. What about the hop between Hotmail and Proofpoint? The Proofpoint server’s Received line makes no note of security at all! This means that the email message was probably not encrypted during this step.

Hotmail either did not support opportunistic TLS encryption for outbound emails, or Proofpoint did not support receipt of messages over TLS, and thus, TLS could not be used. With additional context, you can know which server supports TLS and which does not.

In this case, we know that Proofpoint supports inbound TLS encryption. In fact, from another example message where LuxSci sent a message to Proofpoint, we see the Received line:

Received: from unknown [44.44.44.44] (EHLO wgh.luxsci.com)
	by dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com.ppe-hosted.com
        (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	with ESMTP id b-022.p01c11m003.ppe-hosted.com
        (envelope-from <from@domain.com>);
	Mon, 02 Feb 2009 19:28:27 -0700 (MST)

The red text makes it clear that the message was indeed encrypted. Based on the additional context, we can deduce that the Hotmail sending server did not securely transmit the email using TLS.

How To Tell if an Email is Encrypted With TLS

  1. When analyzing your message headers, consider the following items to determine if the email is encrypted:
    1. The receiving server will log what kind of encryption, if any, was used in receiving the message in the headers.
    2. Different email servers use different formats and syntax to display the encryption used. Look for keywords like “SSL,” “TLS,” and “Encryption,” which will signify this information.
    3. Not all servers will record the use of encryption. While LuxSci has always logged encryption use, not every email service provider does. It is possible to use TLS encryption and not log it. Sometimes, there is no way to tell from the headers if a message is encrypted if it is not logged.
    4. Messages passed between servers at the same provider do not necessarily need TLS encryption to be secure. For example, LuxSci has back-channel private network connections between many servers so that information can be securely passed between them without SMTP TLS. So, the lack of TLS usage between two servers does not mean the transmission between them was “insecure.” You may also see multiple received lines listing the same server: the server passes the message between different processes within itself. This communication also does not need to be TLS encrypted.
    5. If you are a LuxSci customer, you can view online email delivery reports to see if TLS was used for any particular message. We record the kind of encryption in the delivery reports, so it’s easy to see which emails were encrypted.

How can you Ensure Emails Are Securely Transmitted?

With some servers not recording TLS in message headers, how can you determine if a message was transmitted securely from sender to recipient?

To answer this question accurately, you must understand the properties, servers, and networks involved. It may be easy to determine that the message was transmitted securely if included in the header information. However, the absence of information does not necessarily mean the message was insecurely transmitted. You can only know this if you know what each system’s servers record.

In our example of a message from Hotmail to LuxSci, you need to know that:

  1. Proofpoint and LuxSci will always log the use of TLS in the headers. We can infer that the Hotmail to Proofpoint transmission was not secure as nothing was recorded there.
  2. The transmission of messages within LuxSci’s infrastructure is secure due to private back channel transmissions. So, even though there is no mention of TLS in every Received line after LuxSci accepts the message from Proofpoint (in this example), transferring the messages between servers in LuxSci is as secure as using TLS. Also, the same server can add multiple received lines as it talks to itself. Generally, these hand-offs on the same server will not use TLS, as there is no need. In the LuxSci example, we see this as “abc.luxsci.com” adds several headers.
  3. We don’t know anything about Hotmail’s email servers, so we don’t know how secure the initial transmissions within their network are. However, since we know they did not securely transmit the message to Proofpoint, we are not confident that the transmissions and processing within Hotmail (which may have gone unrecorded) were secure.

Was the email message sent and received using encryption?

We skipped steps 1 and 3 and focused on step 2 – the transmission between servers. Steps 1 and 3 are equally, if not more, necessary. Why? Because eavesdropping on the internet between ISPs is less of a problem than eavesdropping near the sender and recipient (i.e., in their workplace or local wireless hotspot). So, it’s essential to ensure messages are sent securely and received securely. This means:

  • Sending: Use SMTP over SSL or TLS when sending messages from an email client or use WebMail over a secure connection (HTTPS).
  • Receiving: Ensure your POP or IMAP connection is secured via SSL or TLS. If using WebMail to read your email, be sure it is over a secure connection (HTTPS).
  • WebMail: There is generally no record in the email headers to indicate if a message sent using WebMail was transmitted from the end-user to WebMail over a secure connection (SSL/HTTPS).

You can typically control one side and ensure it is secure; you can’t control the other without taking extra steps. So, what can you do to ensure your message is secure even if it might not be transmitted with encryption or if the recipient tries to access it insecurely?

You could use end-to-end email encryption (like PGP or S/MIME, which are included in SecureLine) or a secure web portal that doesn’t require the recipient to install or set up anything to get your secure email message. These methods meet HIPAA and other regulatory compliance requirements for secure data transmission and provide complete confidence that the message will be sent and received securely.

LuxSci’s SecureLine offers flexible encryption options, including TLS, secure web portal, PGP, and S/MIME. Its dynamic capabilities can determine what types of encryption the recipient’s server supports to ensure your emails are always sent securely. Contact our team today to learn more about how to secure your emails.

hands on a keyboard sending secure email

How to Secure SMTP Email Delivery with TLS

Secure email sending is a priority for organizations that communicate sensitive data externally. One of the most common ways to send secure emails is with SMTP TLS. TLS stands for Transport Layer Security and is the successor of SSL (Secure Socket Layer). TLS is one of the standard ways that computers on the internet transmit information over an encrypted channel. In general, when one computer connects to another computer and uses TLS, the following happens:

  1. Computer A connects to Computer B (no security)
  2. Computer B says “Hello” (no security)
  3. Computer A says, “Let’s talk securely over TLS” (no security)
  4. Computers A and B agree on how to do this (secure)
  5. The rest of the conversation is encrypted (secure)

In particular:

  • The conversation is encrypted
  • Computer A can verify the identity of Computer B (by examining its SSL certificate, which is required for this dialog)
  • The conversation cannot be eavesdropped upon (without Computer A knowing)
  • A third party cannot modify the conversation
  • Third parties cannot inject other information into the conversation.

TLS and SSL help make the internet a more secure place. One popular way to use TLS is to secure SMTP to protect the transmission of email messages between servers.

Secure SMTP Email Delivery with TLS 

The mechanism and language by which one email server transmits email messages to another email server is called Simple Mail Transport Protocol, or SMTP. For a long time, email servers have had the option of using TLS to transparently encrypt the message transmission from one server to another.

When available, using TLS with SMTP ensures the message contents are secured during transmission between the servers. Unfortunately, not all servers support TLS! Many email providers, especially free or public ones, have historically not supported TLS. Thankfully, the trend is shifting. LuxSci found that most providers now support TLS- approximately 85% of domains tested as of July 2022.

Using TLS requires that the server administrators:

  1. purchase SSL certificates
  2. configure the email servers to use them (and keep these configurations updated)
  3. allocate additional computational resources on the email servers involved.

For TLS transmission to be used, the destination email server must offer support for TLS, and the sending computer or server must be configured to use TLS connections when possible.

The sending computer or server could be configured for:

  1. No TLS: never use it.
  2. Opportunistic TLS: use it if available; if not, send it insecurely.
  3. Forced TLS: use TLS or do not deliver the email at all.

How Secure is Email Delivery over SMTP TLS?

TLS protects the transmission of the email message contents. It does nothing to protect the security of the message before it is sent or after it arrives at its destination. For that, other encryption mechanisms may be used, such as PGP, S/MIME, or storage in a secure portal.

For sending sensitive information to customers, transmission security is the minimum standard for compliance with healthcare and financial regulations. TLS is appropriate to meet most compliance requirements and offers an excellent alternative to more robust and less user-friendly encryption methods (like PGP and S/MIME).

There are different versions of TLS- 1.0 and 1.1 use older ciphers and are not as secure, while TLS 1.2 and 1.3 use newer ciphers and are more secure. When an email is sent, the level of TLS used is as secure as can be negotiated between the sending and receiving servers. If they both support strong encryption (like AES 256), then that will be used. If not, a weaker grade of encryption may be used. The sending and receiving servers can choose the types of encryption they will support. If there is no overlap in what they support, then TLS will fail (this is rare).

What About Replies to Secure Messages?

Let’s say you send a message to someone that is securely delivered to their inbox over TLS. Then, that person replies to you. Will that reply be secure? This may be important if you are communicating sensitive information. The reply will use TLS only if:

  1. The recipient’s servers support TLS for outbound email (there is no way to test this externally).
  2. The mail servers (where the “From” or “Reply” email address is hosted) support TLS for inbound email.
  3. Both servers support overlapping TLS ciphers and protocols and can agree on a mutually acceptable means of encryption.

Unless familiar with the providers in question, it cannot be assumed that replies will use TLS. So, what should you do? Ultimately, it depends on what compliance standards you must meet, the level of risk you are willing to accept, and the types of communications you send. There are two general approaches to this question:

  1. Conservative. If replies must be secure in all cases, assuming TLS will be used is unreasonable. In this case, a more secure method should be used to encrypt the messages in transit and store them upon arrival. The recipient must log in to a secure portal to view the message and reply securely. Alternatively, PGP or S/MIME could be used for additional security.
  2. Aggressive. In some compliance situations like HIPAA, healthcare providers must ensure that ePHI is sent securely to patients. However, patients are not beholden to HIPAA and can send their information insecurely to anyone they want. If the patient’s reply is insecure, that could be okay. For these reasons, and because using TLS for email security is so easy, many do not worry about the security of email replies. However, this should be a risk factor you consider in an internal security audit. Consider nuanced policies that allow you to send less sensitive messages with TLS while sending more sensitive messages with higher security.

What are the Weaknesses of SMTP TLS?

As discussed, SMTP TLS has been around for a long time and has recently seen a great deal of adoption. However, it has some deficiencies compared to other types of email security:

  • There is no mandatory support for TLS in the email system.
  • A receiver’s support of the SMTP TLS option can be trivially removed by an active man-in-the-middle because TLS certificates are not actively verified.
  • Encryption is not used if any aspect of the TLS negotiation is undecipherable/garbled. It is very easy for a man-in-the-middle to inject garbage into the TLS handshake (which is done in clear text) and have the connection downgraded to plain text (opportunistic TLS) or have the connection fail (forced TLS).
  • Even when SMTP TLS is offered and accepted, the certificate presented during the TLS handshake is usually not checked to see if it is for the expected domain and unexpired. Most MTAs offer self-signed certificates as a pro forma. Thus, in many cases, one has an encrypted channel to an unauthenticated MTA, which can only prevent passive eavesdropping.

The Latest Updates to Secure SMTP TLS

Some solutions help remedy these issues—for example, SMTP Strict Transport Security. SMTP STS enables recipient servers to publish information about their SMTP TLS support in their DNS. This prevents man-in-the-middle downgrades to plain text delivery, ensures more robust TLS protocols are used, and can enable certificate validation.

In addition, users can adopt TLS 1.3. NIST recommends that government agencies develop migration plans to support TLS 1.3 by January 1, 2024. LuxSci supports both SMTP MTA-STS and TLS 1.3.

How Secure SMTP TLS Email Works with LuxSci

Inbound TLS

LuxSci’s inbound email servers support TLS for encrypted inbound email delivery from any sending email provider that also supports that. For selected organizations, LuxSci also locks down its servers to only accept email from them if delivered over TLS.

Outbound Opportunistic TLS

LuxSci’s outbound email servers will always use TLS with any server that claims to support it and with whom we can talk TLS v1.0+ using a strong cipher. The message will not be sent securely if the TLS connection to such a server fails (due to misconfiguration or no security protocols in common). Outbound opportunistic TLS encryption is automatic for all LuxSci customers, even those without SecureLine.

Forced TLS

When Forced TLS is enabled, the message is either dropped or sent with an alternate form of encryption if the recipient’s server does not support TLS. This ensures that messages will never be sent insecurely. Forced TLS is also in place for all LuxSci customers sending to banks and organizations that have requested that we globally enforce TLS to their servers.

Support for strong encryption

LuxSci’s servers will use the strongest encryption supported by the recipient’s email server. LuxSci servers will never employ an encryption cipher that uses less than 128 bits (they will fail to deliver rather than deliver via an excessively weak encryption cipher), and they will never use SSL v2 or SSL v3.

Does LuxSci Have Any Other Special TLS Features?

When using LuxSci SecureLine for outbound email encryption:

  1. SMTP MTA STS: LuxSci’s domains support SMTP MTA STS, and LuxSci’s SecureLine encryption system leverages STS information about recipient domains to improve connection security.
  2. Try TLS: Account administrators can have secure messages “try TLS first” and deliver that way. If TLS is unavailable, the messages would fall back and use more secure options like PGP, S/MIME, or Escrow. Email security is easy, seamless, and automatic when communicating internally or with others who support TLS.
  3. TLS Exclusive: This is a special LuxSci-exclusive TLS sending feature. TLS Exclusive is just like Forced TLS, except that messages that can’t connect over TLS are just dropped. This is ideal for low-importance emails that must still be compliant, like email marketing messages in healthcare. In such cases, the ease of use of TLS is more important than receiving the message.
  4. TLS Only Forwarding: Account administrators can restrict any server-side email forwarding settings in their accounts from allowing forwarding to any email addresses that do not support TLS for email delivery.
  5. Encryption Escalation: Often, TLS is suitable for most messages, but some messages need to be encrypted using something stronger. LuxSci allows users to escalate the encryption from TLS to Escrow with a click (in WebMail) or by entering particular text in the subject line (for messages sent from email programs like Outlook).
  6. Domain Monitoring: When TLS delivery is enabled for SecureLine accounts, messages will never be insecurely sent to domains that purport to be TLS-enabled, i.e., TLS delivery is enforced and no longer “opportunistic.” The system monitors these domains and updates their TLS-compliance status daily.
  7. Double Encryption: Messages sent using SecureLine and PGP or S/MIME will still use Opportunistic TLS whenever possible for message delivery. In these cases, messages are often “double encrypted.” First, they are encrypted with PGP or S/MIME and may be encrypted again during transport using TLS.
  8. No Weak TLS: Unlike many organizations, LuxSci’s TLS support for SMTP and other servers only supports those protocol levels (e.g., TLS v1.0+) and ciphers recommended by NIST for government communications and which are required for HIPAA. So, all communications with LuxSci servers will be over a compliant implementation of TLS.

For customers who can use TLS to meet security or compliance requirements, it enables seamless security and “use of email as usual.” SecureLine with Forced TLS enables clients to take advantage of this level of security whenever possible while automatically falling back to other methods when TLS is unavailable.

Of course, using Forced TLS as the sole method of encryption is optional; if your compliance needs are more substantial, you can turn off TLS-Only delivery or restrict it so that it is used only with specific recipients.

If your email use cases are complicated, LuxSci’s flexibility enables the secure sending of emails to any recipient, regardless of their email service provider’s support for TLS. Contact the LuxSci sales team to learn more about our secure SMTP TLS email sending.

patient engagement tools

Why Healthcare Insurers Should Send Explanation of Benefits Statements Via Email

Explanation of Benefits statements or EOBs are mission-critical communications for health insurers because they ensure transparency, help detect billing errors or fraud, and most importantly, keep patients informed about their benefits and related payments.

However, the most conventional method of sending out EoBs, traditional mail, has several drawbacks that can prevent important information about healthcare coverage from reaching the intended recipient. This can leave policyholders in the dark about their healthcare coverage, which can lead to confusion and dissatisfaction with their insurance provider when they receive an unexpected medical bill. This can also drive up inbound calls into your claims department or contact center.

Because Explanation of Benefits statements contain the protected health information (PHI) of policyholders, insurers are bound by HIPAA (the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) regulations to ensure their secure delivery. Consequently, the risks inherent to sending paper EoB statements in the mail not only have security implications but also potential consequences for non-compliance.

With all this in mind, this post discusses why healthcare insurers should send EoBs to their policyholders via secure email instead of traditional mail. We detail the various benefits of making the switch to electronic EoBs, which include enhanced security, better adherence to compliance regulations, and the opportunity to save millions of dollars per month.

Protecting Patient Privacy

The primary reason that insurance companies should shift to email EoBs as opposed to traditional mail is that it’s far more secure. Sending an EoB via email drastically decreases the risk of protected health information (PHI) getting into the wrong hands. When sent in paper form by mail, an EoB could be:

  • Lost, stolen or damaged in transit
  • Delivered to the wrong address
  • Not properly deposited in a letter or mailbox, then stolen
  • Intercepted within the intended address by another individual who lives at or has access to the residence.

As detailed later in this post, email also allows for various controls and processes, which mitigate the risks of unsuccessful message delivery.

Most importantly, secure email provides data encryption, which safeguards the sensitive patient data within EoBs during transmission and when stored by rendering it unreadable to malicious actors who might intercept it. Physical mail, in contrast, offers no such protection, as someone who intercepts a paper EoB form can simply open it and freely read its contents.

Finally, secure email delivery platforms feature identity verification and access controls that enable healthcare insurers to restrict access to PHI to authorized personnel, limiting its exposure. They also provide auditing capabilities to track access to patient data, and quickly identify the source of security breaches.

HIPAA Compliance Benefits

Because sending an Explanation of Benefits statement via email is more secure, and better protects any patient data contained within them, this also reduces the risk of HIPAA compliance violations.

First and foremost, HIPAA regulations mandate that communications containing PHI, such as EoBs, must securely reach the intended recipient. By eliminating the risk of physical interception or non-delivery, and the compliance violations from a resulting security breach, insurers can better adhere to HIPAA regulations using email for sending EOBs. On a similar note, the security features built into a HIPAA compliant email platform, such as encryption, access controls, and audit logs, help insurers to satisfy the requirements of HIPAA’s Privacy and Security Rules in their compliance efforts.

Another considerable benefit of using secure email to send policyholders their EoBs, or, in fact, any communication containing PHI, is that it’s far easier to implement breach notification protocols. Email delivery platforms provide real-time tracking, so companies can pinpoint email message failures quickly and act accordingly. Similarly, intrusion detection systems and other cybersecurity measures that support email systems can enable faster detection and containment of data breaches.

In stark contrast, physical mail is far more difficult to track – and even those limited capabilities are reserved for more expensive delivery options. Consequently, security breaches via mail could go unnoticed for days or even weeks. If you’re unaware of a data breach, or have not yet contained or mitigated it, you’re then unable to inform all affected parties, resulting in further HIPAA violations.

Increased Deliverability Rates

By greatly mitigating the security risks presented by physical mail, i.e., the various ways an EoB could fall into the wrong hands, sending an EoB by email increases your ability to get more EOBs into the hands of policyholders, more quickly. At the same time, policyholders can make faster decisions regarding their healthcare.

The ability to track secure email gives you greater control over EOB deliverability, as it allows organizations to determine the cause of delivery failure and can also make subsequent attempts. Additionally, the process of determining the reason for the message delivery failures can also reveal security issues; the same process, however, is very difficult to achieve with traditional mail.

Here’s how the typical protocol for resending a secured email goes beyond what you can do with managing traditional mail delivery:

  • Determine the cause of non-delivery: verify that the intended recipient information is correct and check for issues like a full email inbox or security misconfigurations.
  • Don’t automatically resend: to avoid exposing PHI to the wrong person, confirm the intended recipient’s email address through an alternative verified channel, e.g., phone call, secure SMS, etc.
  • Log the incident: document the delivery failure, steps taken to determine its cause, attempts, etc.
  • Reattempt message delivery: if the investigation deems it safe, attempt message redelivery with the corrected information.

In the event that subsequent delivery attempts fail, it’s best practice to contact the individual to arrange the most convenient and secure alternative to deliver their EoBs.

Cost Savings

Simply put, sending Explanation of Benefits statements via email instead of traditional mail saves health insurers money – potentially lots of it. Processing EOBs from start to finish can cost health insurers one to two dollars or more per EOB. That’s a lot. The biggest opportunity for cost reduction is tied to the money saved on printing and mailing paper EoB statements. Additionally, the cost of administering the delivery of EoB forms, ensuring their delivery, etc., is lowered when it’s done electronically. Not to mention, resending EoBs in the event of their non-delivery is much easier and cheaper via email.

In a broader sense, increasing the deliverability and the success rate of sending EoBs helps a larger number of policyholders better understand the details of their insurance coverage, i.e., how it works, which services and procedures it covers, etc. As a result of their policyholders being more informed, insurers won’t spend as much time explaining policy details and cost breakdowns to their members, allowing them to divert the otherwise required resources to other areas of the business.

Reduced Carbon Footprint

Finally, it’s difficult to highlight the benefits of sending EoBs to policyholders by email without recognizing the positive environmental impact, too. Email EoBs cut down on paper, for both the forms themselves and the envelopes they’re mailed in. Then there’s the matter of the electricity and ink involved in printing them, the emissions produced in their delivery, etc. Opting to send EoBs via email reduces all these factors, which enables healthcare organizations to lower their carbon footprint and, where applicable, meet their sustainability obligations or goals.

Deliver EoBs More Securely, Reliably, and at Lower Cost with LuxSci

LuxSci’s Secure High Volume Email Solution enables healthcare insurance companies to instantly send Explanation of Benefits statements to policyholders at a massive scale, extending into hundreds of thousands or millions per month.

Our HIPAA compliant email delivery platform features:

  • Dedicated IPs that isolate critical transactional messages, such as EoBs, from other email traffic, allowing LuxSci customers to reach deliverability rates of 98% or more.
  • Real-time tracking for determining the delivery status of EoBs, as well as troubleshooting unsuccessful delivery attempts.
  • Flexible encryption through LuxSci’s proprietary SecureLine Technology, which automatically adjusts encryption settings according to the recipient to better ensure the protection of sensitive data.

Contact us today to learn more about how your organization can begin the transition to electronic EoBs.

HIPAA Compliance and Email Communications

Improve the Patient Experience with Personalized Patient Engagement

Patient expectations of healthcare providers have dramatically changed in the last decade. The introduction of technology and the widespread adoption of digital communications in other industries have increased the pressure on healthcare providers to provide a comparable experience.

The 2023 Healthcare Consumer Perspectives on Digital Engagement and AI report conducted by Dynata Research found that more patients are adopting digital tools to manage their health and want their providers to provide a consistent experience across all channels. To improve the patient experience, a personalized patient engagement strategy is necessary.

Personalized Patient Engagement Improves the Patient Experience

Healthcare organizations manage so much data that can be used to improve the patient experience. As audience segmentation and personalization techniques have become more common in other industries like e-commerce and personal care, consumers are starting to expect the same experiences from their healthcare providers.

For example, media streaming services make personalized recommendations for new shows based on what you have previously watched. People like these features because it helps them discover new content they may not know about. Likewise, patients are beginning to expect a similar personalized patient engagement experience from their healthcare provider. Suppose a patient wants to control their diabetes diagnosis and communicates with their provider about this at an appointment. Afterward, when they log into the patient portal or receive follow-up information, they expect to receive relevant information that aligns with that provider’s conversation.

survey data patient preferences

Proactive, personalized patient engagement can also drive patients to make the right choices in managing their health. By sending patients the correct information at the right time in the context of their individual health journey, it is easier for them to manage their own health.

Shifting Preferences for Digital Tools Enable Personalized Patient Engagement

As more people are open to incorporating digital tools into their healthcare journeys, it has revealed new patient engagement opportunities. Several reasons led healthcare organizations to embrace digital tools. The coronavirus pandemic kicked off a necessary wave of digital transformation because of the rapid transmission of the disease through close contact. The desire to use these tools has remained strong even after institutions largely reopened in 2021. Patients have also shown no desire to go back to the way things used to be. Digital channels and tools like patient portals, email, medical devices, and mobile applications all make it easier for patients to manage their health on the go.

shifting digital preferences survey data

As patient preferences have shifted to embrace digital channels and technologies, organizations that can implement digital-first personalized patient engagement strategies intelligently are more likely to have satisfied and healthier patients. However, healthcare organizations must strive to provide a consistent experience across both in-person and digital avenues. According to the survey, the number one reason consumers would consider changing their healthcare provider is “complex or confusing experiences.” Poorly implemented and executed patient engagement can negatively impact the patient experience and retention, so it’s essential to be thoughtful in your approach.

How to Personalize the Patient Experience

Traditionally, HIPAA compliance requirements have made it difficult for healthcare providers to utilize protected health information (PHI) in personalized patient engagement efforts. Using PHI in communications is vital to craft messaging relevant to the patient’s health journey. However, when transmitting and storing PHI, HIPAA regulations must be followed to protect patient privacy.

The first step to executing personalized patient engagement involves selecting the right tools. Many traditional digital engagement tools are not designed to meet these stringent encryption and security requirements. By selecting tools that meet HIPAA’s technical requirements (like LuxSci’s Secure Marketing and Secure High Volume Email) and properly training employees, healthcare teams can employ the same segmentation and personalization techniques to reach patients with relevant and consistent communications.

Conclusion

Personalizing patient engagement is one way to improve patient marketing and retention. Contact us today to learn more about improving the patient experience with secure email communications.