What are the Infrastructure Requirements For HIPAA Compliant Email?

HIPAA Compliant Email
Pete Wermter
April 3, 2025

Healthcare providers, payers, and suppliers increasingly rely on email communication for a wide variety of purposes pertaining to their patients’ and customer’s healthcare journeys. However, ensuring email messaging is both effective and HIPAA compliant requires the right infrastructure, including dedicated environments, high throughput and low latency, end-to-end encryption, scalability and compliance monitoring.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act’s (HIPAA) regulations mandate a series of data security and privacy requirements to safeguard the electronic protected health information (ePHI) contained in emails, which is a good place to start. At the same time, however, healthcare organizations must also consider deliverability best practices to ensure their messages successfully reach the intended recipients.

With all this in mind, this post discusses the infrastructure requirements for HIPAA compliant email. We’ll explore the differences between transactional and marketing emails, as well as infrastructure and compliance considerations for each.

What Are Transactional Emails?

Transactional emails are messages that correspond to a previous interaction between a healthcare organization and an individual. A patient or customer will trigger the delivery of a transactional email by taking a specific action – with the transaction email being confirmation of the action.

Examples of transactional emails include:

Explanation of Benefits
Billing statements
Invoices
Appointment confirmations and reminders
Order updates and shipping notifications
Password resets and security notifications
Plan renewal confirmation
Payment failure notifications
In-home care communications

Healthcare companies can also use transactional emails to communicate relevant instructions, next steps, or follow-up actions.

What Are Marketing Emails?

Marketing emails contain content designed to influence the recipient into taking a particular action, usch as ordering a new product or sign up for a new service. Subsequently, they often contain informational materials intended to educate the individual so they can make a more informed decision.

Examples of marketing emails include:

New product or service launches
Promotional offers
Loyalty reward notifications
Customer reviews and testimonials
Educational materials or campaigns
Preventative care outreach
Event Invitations
Re-engagement messages (e.g., “We Miss You!..”)

With the proper data safeguards and the effective use of ePHI, marketing emails can be personalized to be made more relevant to the recipient. This then allows patients or customers to be segmented into subgroups according to particular commonalities, e.g., age, gender, lifestyle factors, medical conditions, etc.

Opt-in Rules for HIPAA-Compliant Email Communication

One significant difference between marketing and transactional emails is that recipients must explicitly opt-in to receive marketing emails.

HIPAA requires explicit patient consent for marketing emails if they contain ePHI, requiring individuals to opt-in to receive email marketing communications from a healthcare organization. Neglecting to allow people to opt-in to your marketing communications leaves your company open to the consequences of HIPAA non-compliance, which include financial penalties and reputational damage.

Conversely, healthcare organizations aren’t required to obtain opt-ins to send transactional emails, but these communications are still subject to other HIPAA regulations, such as encryption and audit logging.

Additionally, marketing emails must comply with the CAN-SPAM Act: US legislation that governs commercial email communication and protects individuals from deceptive sales and marketing practices. The CAN-SPAM Act requires healthcare organizations to provide an opt-out mechanism in the event they no longer wish to receive marketing emails. Subsequently, you must always allow individuals to opt out of marketing emails to stay compliant.

Email Infrastructure Requirements For HIPPA-Compliance

As the vast majority of healthcare organizations need to send marketing and transactional emails, they must have the appropriate infrastructure to facilitate the optimal delivery of both types of emails. Consequently, for HIPAA compliant email, they need to establish the appropriate infrastructure configurations for each, according to their differing purposes, sending patterns, and compliance considerations.

Let’s look at the infrastructure requirements for each email type in turn, before looking at considerations that pertain to both types of email.

Key Transactional Email Infrastructure Considerations

Transactional emails are sent to a sole patient or customer, with the information therein only intended for that specific individual. Additionally, they can be highly time-sensitive: for example, a password reset or similar emails related to logins and service use must be immediate, while order confirmations need to be delivered ASAP to reassure clients of a company’s reliability and trustworthiness.

Accounting for this, the infrastructure requirements for transactional emails include:

High Speed and Low Latency: servers that are optimized for high IOPS (input/output operations per second) and minimal processing delays to ensure near-instant delivery
Dedicated IPs: this helps healthcare companies maintain a strong sender reputation to avoid blacklisting, being labelled as spam, etc. This is crucial for reliable, fast delivery.
High Availability and Redundancy: this includes load balancers, failover servers, and geographically distributed data centers to ensure comprehensive disaster recovery and more robust business continuity protocols.

Key Marketing Email Infrastructure Considerations

In contrast to transactional messages, marketing emails must often be sent out in high volumes, which could be as many as hundreds of thousands or millions per month. As a result, marketing email campaigns have different computational demands, i.e., CPU and storage, than transactional messages intended for a single person.

Subsequently, the infrastructure requirements for marketing emails include:

High Volume and Scalability: marketing messages require a larger throughput to facilitate the bulk delivery of email. Additionally, servers should scale easily to accommodate increasingly larger campaigns without suffering bottlenecks.
Queueing and Throttling: marketing email infrastructure must prevent sending surges that could trigger spam filters or overload recipient servers, which often results in blacklisting.
Dedicated vs. Shared Infrastructure: it’s important to consider whether to opt for private versus shared infrastructure, depending on the size of your organization and the scale of your campaigns. Large senders often use dedicated IPs for better control, while smaller companies or campaigns might use shared pools with strict sender reputation management.

Key Infrastructure Considerations for Both Types of Email

Lastly, there are infrastructure requirements that apply to both types of email that will help facilitate their fast and reliable delivery, respectively. These include:

Separate Infrastructure: consider hosting your transactional and marketing emails on separate servers. This benefits transactional emails in particular, as there are several factors inherent to marketing email campaigns, such as bounced emails and being flagged as spam, that affect an email IP’s reputation. Separate infrastructure maintains the integrity of a healthcare company’s IP address for transactional emails, ensuring they are delivered unimpeded.
Encryption: the ePHI in all email communications must be encrypted in transit, i.e., when sent to individuals, and at rest, i.e., when stored in a database. This helps safeguard the patient data within the message, regardless of its nature.
HIPAA Compliance Monitoring: remaining aware of what ePHI is included in email communications. This keeps data exposure to a minimum and mitigates the unintentional inclusion of patient data in email communications.
Logging and Auditing: this not only allows you to track email activity, but you also can measure the efficacy of your email communications, who accessed ePHI, and what they did with it. This is an essential part of HIPAA compliance and will be subject to tighter regulation when the updates to HIPAA’s Security Rule come into effect in late 2025.

HIPAA-Complaint Email Solutions From LuxSci

LuxSci offers HIPAA compliant email solutions designed to optimize the reliability and deliverability of both transactional and marketing emails.

LuxSci’s Secure High Volume Email solution offers:

Dedicated, high-performance infrastructure to ensure fast and reliable delivery.
Scalable infrastructure for high-volume email campaigns, ensuring reliability even as sent emails venture into the hundreds of thousands or millions.
Dedicated IPs and reputation management tools to prevent blacklisting and deliverability issues.
Logging, tracking, and audit trails for HIPAA compliance and security monitoring.

LuxSci’s Secure Email Marketing platform provides:

Hypersegmentation for personalized patient and customer engagement.
Detailed tracking and reporting capabilities for performance monitoring and compliance auditing.
Automated campaign scheduling for reduced administrative overhead.
Opt-in and list management tools to ensure compliance with HIPAA and CAN-SPAM.

Discover how our solutions can meet your evolving email infrastructure requirements today.

Pete Wermter

As a marketing leader with more than 20 years of experience in enterprise software marketing, Pete's career includes a mix of corporate and field marketing roles, stretching from Silicon Valley to the EMEA and APAC regions, with a focus on data protection and optimizing engagement for regulated industries, such as healthcare and financial services. Pete Wermter — LinkedIn

Get in touch

Find The Best Solution For Your Organization

Talk To An Expert & Get A Quote

First Name

Last Name

Work Email

Phone

Company

Type of Inquiry

Company Size

Message (optional)

Acceptance

I consent to be contacted by LuxSci for this inquiry and other relevant content, products, and services. You may unsubscribe from these communications at any time. We're committed to your privacy. For more information, check out our Privacy Policy.

A member of our staff will reach out to you

Search

Get Your Free E-Book!

LuxSci High Email Deliverability Best Practices Paper

What you’ll learn:

LuxSci Earns 19 G2 Spring 2026 Badges

March 23, 2026
Pete Wermter

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.

Traditional MFA No Longer Qualifies as “Reasonable” Security

March 17, 2026
Pete Wermter

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.

Encryption Optional Email Will Fail Audits in 2026 and Beyond

February 24, 2026
Pete Wermter

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.

LuxSci and Oiva Health Combine to Form Transatlantic Healthcare Communications Group

February 12, 2026
Pete Wermter

Boston & Helsinki, February 12, 2026 – LuxSci, a provider of secure healthcare communications solutions in the United States, and Oiva Health, a Nordic provider of Digital Care solutions in social and healthcare services, today announced that the companies are joining forces. Backed by Main Capital Partners (“Main”), the combination brings together two complementary platforms and teams, forming a strong transatlantic software group focused on secure healthcare communications.

Founded in 1999, LuxSci is a U.S. provider of HIPAA‑compliant, secure email, marketing, and forms solutions. Its application and infrastructure software enable organizations to securely deliver personalized, sensitive data at scale to support a broad range of healthcare communications and workflows including care coordination, benefits and payments, marketing, wellness communications, after care and ongoing care. Certified by HITRUST for the highest levels of data security, LuxSci serves dozens of healthcare enterprises and hundreds of mid‑market organizations.

Founded in 2010, Oiva Health is a provider of digital care and communications solutions in the Nordics. Headquartered in Finland, with additional offices in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, Oiva Health offers digital care and digital clinic solutions – including digital visits, secure messaging, online scheduling and appointments, and caregiver communications – serving the long-term care, especially elderly care, and occupational healthcare verticals. The company employs approximately 60 people and has recently expanded across the Nordic region, with a growing presence in Norway and Sweden.

The combination of LuxSci and Oiva Health creates a larger, cross Atlantic group with complementary solutions, serving the U.S. and European markets. Together, the companies offer healthcare providers, payers, and suppliers a comprehensive suite of tools to communicate securely and compliantly, spanning communications, workflows, and virtual care delivery.

Daan Visscher, Partner and Co-Head North America at Main, commented: “We are pleased to announce this cross Atlantic transaction, creating an internationally active secure communications player within the healthcare and home care space. The combined product suite enables healthcare organizations to drive much needed efficiency gains in healthcare provision addressing a global trend of rising costs, aging population, and increasing pressure on resources needed to provide high-quality care.”

Mark Leonard, CEO of LuxSci, said, “We are thrilled to join forces with Oiva Health and believe that together we can truly make a difference in healthcare coordination, access, and delivery. We see an exciting path forward with our customers benefiting from an end-to-end, secure and compliant approach to optimizing both healthcare communications and today’s frontline workers, which we need now more than ever.”

Juhana Ojala, CEO at Oiva Health, concluded, “We look forward to this new chapter together with LuxSci. We are very excited about the strong alignment between our solutions, which especially strongly positions us to expand our flagship Digital Care offering to the high-potential U.S. care market – from care coordination to care delivery to in-home and institutional care.”

Nothing contained in this Press Release is intended to project, predict, guarantee, or forecast the future performance of any investment. This Press Release is for information purposes only and is not investment advice or an offer to buy or sell any securities or to invest in any funds or other investment vehicles managed by Main Capital Partners or any other person.

[END OF MESSAGE]

About LuxSci

LuxSci is a U.S.-based provider of secure healthcare communications solutions for the healthcare industry. The company offers secure email, marketing, forms and hosting, delivering HIPAA‑compliant communication solutions that enable organizations to safely manage and transmit sensitive data. Founded in 1999, LuxSci serves more than 1,900 customers across healthcare verticals, including providers, payers, suppliers, and healthcare retail, home care providers, and healthcare systems, as well as organizations operating in other highly regulated industries. LuxSci is HITRUST‑certified with example clients being Athenahealth, 1800 Contacts, Lucerna Health, Eurofins, and Rotech Healthcare, among others.

About Oiva Health

Oiva Health is a Digital Care provider in the Nordics, offering a comprehensive Digital Platform for integrated health and care services to digitalize primary healthcare, social care, hospital healthcare and long-term care services. The company was founded in 2010 and currently employs approximately 60 people in Finland, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden serving domestic municipalities, customers and partners, such as City of Helsinki, Keski-Suomi Welfare Region, Länsi-Uusimaa Welfare Region in Finland, and Viborg municipality in Denmark with its Digital Care platform. Annually over 5 million customer contacts are handled digitally through Oiva Health’s Digital Care and Digital Clinic platforms.

About Main Capital Partners

Main Capital Partners is a software investor managing private equity funds active in the Benelux, DACH, the Nordics, France, and the United States with approximately EUR 7 billion in assets under management. Main has over 20 years of experience in strengthening software companies and works closely with the management teams across its portfolio as a strategic partner to achieve profitable growth and create larger outstanding software groups. Main has approximately 95 employees operating out of its offices in The Hague, Düsseldorf, Stockholm, Antwerp, Paris, and an affiliate office in Boston. Main maintains an active portfolio of over 50 software companies. The underlying portfolio employs approximately 15,000 employees. Through its Main Social Institute, Main supports students with grants and scholarships to study IT and Computer Science at Technical Universities and Universities of Applied Sciences.

The sender of this press release is Main Capital Partners.

For more information, please contact:

Main Capital Partners
Sophia Hengelbrok (PR & Communications Specialist)

sophia.hengelbrok@main.nl

+ 31 6 53 70 76 86

What Are HIPAA Marketing Guidelines?

May 12, 2025
Erik Kangas

HIPAA marketing guidelines are official interpretations and best practice recommendations issued by the Department of Health and Human Services that help healthcare organizations implement Privacy Rule marketing requirements effectively. These guidelines clarify regulatory expectations, provide practical examples of compliant marketing activities, explain authorization procedures, and offer implementation strategies for common healthcare marketing scenarios. Healthcare organizations often struggle to interpret broad regulatory language and apply it to specific marketing situations. Official guidance documents and industry best practices help bridge the gap between regulatory requirements and practical implementation challenges.

Official Guidance from Health and Human Services

Privacy Rule guidance documents provide detailed explanations of marketing definitions, authorization requirements, and permitted activities that help healthcare organizations understand their obligations. These documents include examples of different communication types and analysis of when authorization is required. Enforcement guidance explains how the Office for Civil Rights evaluates marketing violations and what factors influence penalty determinations. This guidance helps healthcare organizations understand compliance expectations and prioritize their risk management efforts. Technical assistance materials offer practical implementation advice for common marketing scenarios including patient newsletters, appointment reminders, and promotional campaigns.

Best Practice Recommendations for Authorization Management

Authorization form development should follow standardized templates that include all required elements while using clear language that patients can understand. These forms explain marketing purposes in plain English and avoid legal terminology that might confuse patients. Consent tracking procedures should document authorization decisions, track expiration dates, and process revocation requests immediately to prevent unauthorized communications. Healthcare organizations are required to implement systems that update consent status across all marketing platforms simultaneously. Verification processes ensure that marketing communications only reach patients who have provided valid authorization while preventing accidental disclosure to unauthorized recipients. These processes should aim to include regular audits of recipient lists and authorization documentation.

Communication Content and Approval Procedures

Content review processes should evaluate marketing materials for HIPAA compliance before distribution including assessment of PHI usage, authorization adequacy, and regulatory exemption applicability. These reviews should involve compliance officers, legal counsel, and clinical staff as appropriate. Message development guidelines help marketing teams create compliant content that engages patients effectively while respecting privacy requirements. HIPAA marketing guidelines address PHI usage, consent language, and opt-out mechanisms for different communication types. Quality assurance procedures verify that marketing campaigns meet compliance standards before launch through systematic review of content, recipient lists, and authorization documentation.

Segmentation and Targeting Best Practices

Patient population identification should use minimum necessary principles that limit data access to information needed for specific marketing purposes. Marketing teams should receive aggregated or coded data rather than complete medical records when possible. Demographic targeting strategies can enhance marketing effectiveness while maintaining privacy protections through automated systems that apply targeting criteria without exposing individual patient characteristics. These systems enable personalization while keeping PHI separate from campaign development. Clinical data utilization requires careful evaluation of medical information usage in marketing communications to ensure compliance with authorization scope and minimum necessary standards. Healthcare organizations should develop clear criteria for when clinical data can be included in marketing materials.

Technology Implementation Guidance

Platform selection criteria should prioritize HIPAA compliance features including encryption, access controls, audit logging, and consent management capabilities. Healthcare organizations should evaluate vendors based on their ability to meet regulatory requirements rather than just marketing functionality. System configuration guidelines ensure that marketing platforms are properly set up to maintain compliance throughout their operational lifecycle. HIPAA marketing guidelines address security settings, user permissions, and integration requirements with healthcare systems. Data management procedures govern how patient information is loaded, processed, and stored within marketing platforms while maintaining appropriate security protections. These procedures should include data validation, backup requirements, and disposal protocols.

Compliance Monitoring and Assessment

Audit schedules should establish regular review intervals for marketing activities including authorization compliance, content approval, and staff adherence to established procedures. These audits should be frequent enough to identify issues before they result in regulatory violations. Performance metrics help healthcare organizations track their marketing compliance including authorization rates, consent management effectiveness, and incident frequency. These metrics should provide early warning indicators for potential compliance problems. Documentation requirements ensure that healthcare organizations maintain records demonstrating their compliance efforts including policies, training materials, audit results, and incident response activities. Well kept records support regulatory reviews and demonstrate good faith compliance efforts.

Staff Training and Education Programs

Role-based training ensures that different healthcare personnel receive appropriate education about HIPAA marketing guidelines based on their job responsibilities and PHI access levels. Marketing staff need different training than clinical personnel who might engage in face-to-face marketing activities. Competency assessment procedures verify that staff understand marketing guidelines and can apply them correctly in their daily work activities. These assessments should include scenario-based questions and practical application exercises. Update training programs ensure that staff receive current information about HIPAA marketing guidelines as regulations change or organizational policies are updated. Programs should be conducted regularly and documented for compliance purposes.

Risk Management and Incident Response

Risk identification processes help healthcare organizations recognize potential marketing compliance vulnerabilities before they result in violations. These processes should consider technology risks, procedural gaps, and staff training needs. Violation response procedures provide step-by-step guidance for addressing potential marketing violations including investigation protocols, patient notification requirements, and regulatory reporting obligations. These procedures should be tested regularly and updated based on lessons learned. Preventive measures help healthcare organizations avoid marketing violations through proactive compliance management including policy enforcement, system controls, and staff accountability measures.

Industry-Specific Implementation Considerations

Hospital marketing guidelines address unique challenges faced by large healthcare systems including multiple service lines, diverse patient populations, and complex organizational structures. HIPAA marketing guidelines should consider coordination across departments and facility locations. Medical practice recommendations focus on smaller healthcare organizations with limited compliance resources including simplified procedures, cost-effective solutions, and practical implementation strategies. These recommendations should be scalable as practices grow. Specialty provider guidance addresses marketing considerations for different healthcare specialties including behavioral health, substance abuse treatment, and other areas with enhanced privacy protections.

How Does a Patient Engagement System Improve Healthcare Outcomes?

September 1, 2025
Erik Kangas

A patient engagement system is a digital platform that facilitates communication between healthcare providers and patients while enabling active patient participation in their care through appointment scheduling, secure messaging, educational resources, and health monitoring tools. These platforms empower patients to take ownership of their healthcare journey by providing convenient access to medical records, test results, treatment plans, and direct communication channels with their care teams. Modern patient engagement systems integrate with electronic health records and practice management software to create seamless workflows that enhance both patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes while reducing administrative burden on healthcare staff.

Why Healthcare Entities Need Patient Engagement Systems

Healthcare providers today recognize that engaged patients achieve better health outcomes, demonstrate higher satisfaction rates, and contribute to more efficient care delivery processes. Patient engagement systems serve as the bridge between traditional healthcare delivery models and modern patient expectations for convenient, accessible, and personalized care experiences. These platforms enable healthcare organizations to extend their reach beyond the clinical setting, maintaining connections with patients between appointments while providing tools and resources that support self-management of chronic conditions, medication adherence, and preventive care activities.

The shift toward value-based care models has made patient engagement systems essential for healthcare organizations seeking to improve quality metrics while controlling costs. When patients actively participate in their care through digital engagement platforms, they are more likely to follow treatment protocols, attend scheduled appointments, and proactively communicate with their healthcare teams about changes in their condition. This increased engagement translates into measurable improvements in clinical outcomes, reduced hospital readmissions, and better management of chronic diseases such as diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular conditions. Healthcare organizations implementing these systems systems also benefit from improved efficiency in care coordination, reduced phone call volumes for routine inquiries, and enhanced ability to track and measure patient satisfaction and health outcomes across their patient populations.

Features of Effective Patient Engagement Systems

Modern patient engagement systems incorporate multiple communication channels and self-service capabilities that accommodate diverse patient preferences and technology comfort levels. Secure patient portals provide authenticated access to personal health information, enabling patients to review lab results, medication lists, and visit summaries at their convenience. Appointment scheduling functionality allows patients to book, reschedule, or cancel appointments without calling the practice, reducing administrative workload while providing patients with flexibility to manage their healthcare appointments around their personal schedules.

Two-way messaging capabilities within patient engagement systems enable secure communication between patients and their healthcare teams, facilitating quick responses to medical questions, prescription refill requests, and follow-up care instructions. Educational content delivery through these platforms ensures patients receive relevant, personalized health information based on their specific conditions, treatment plans, and risk factors. Mobile applications extend engagement opportunities by sending appointment reminders, medication alerts, and health tracking prompts directly to patients’ smartphones, increasing the likelihood of sustained engagement with their care plans.

Telehealth integration within these systems has become increasingly important, particularly following the COVID-19 pandemic’s acceleration of virtual care adoption. These integrated platforms enable seamless scheduling of video consultations, secure document sharing before appointments, and follow-up communication after virtual visits. Patient engagement systems also support remote monitoring capabilities, allowing patients to share vital signs, symptom updates, and other health data with their providers between visits, enabling more proactive and personalized care management.

Implementation Strategies

Healthcare organizations implementing patient engagement systems need carefully planned rollout strategies that consider patient demographics, technology readiness, and workflow integration requirements. Successful implementations begin with thorough assessment of existing patient populations to understand their communication preferences, technology usage patterns, and specific engagement needs. Organizations serving older patient populations may require different implementation approaches compared to those serving younger, more technology-savvy demographics, necessitating customized training programs and support resources.

Staff training and workflow redesign represent critical components of successful patient engagement system implementations. Healthcare teams need education about new communication channels, response time expectations, and protocols for managing increased patient-initiated communications through digital platforms. Administrative staff require training on helping patients register for portal access, navigate system features, and troubleshoot common issues. Clinical staff need preparation for managing the increased volume and different types of patient communications that these systems generate.

Change management strategies help healthcare organizations overcome resistance to new engagement technologies while ensuring consistent adoption across all departments. This includes establishing clear policies for response times to patient messages, defining appropriate use cases for different communication channels, and creating escalation procedures for urgent patient concerns received through digital platforms. Healthcare organizations benefit from phased implementation approaches that gradually introduce system features, allowing staff and patients to become comfortable with basic functionality before adding more advanced capabilities.

Measuring Success with Patient Engagement Systems

Healthcare organizations implementing patient engagement systems need robust metrics and monitoring systems to evaluate the effectiveness of their investment and identify opportunities for improvement. Patient satisfaction scores provide valuable insights into how well engagement platforms meet patient expectations and preferences for communication and access to care. Usage analytics reveal which features patients find most valuable, helping organizations optimize their platforms and focus training efforts on underutilized capabilities that could provide additional benefits.

Clinical outcome measurements demonstrate the health impact of increased patient engagement facilitated by digital platforms. Metrics such as medication adherence rates, appointment no-show rates, emergency department utilization, and chronic disease management indicators help healthcare organizations quantify the return on investment for the systems . These measurements also support quality improvement initiatives and value-based care reporting requirements by providing data on patient engagement activities and their correlation with health outcomes.

Operational efficiency metrics capture the impact of patient engagement systems on staff productivity and practice workflows. Reduced phone call volumes for routine inquiries, decreased time spent on appointment scheduling, and improved care coordination efficiency demonstrate the administrative benefits of digital engagement platforms. Healthcare organizations can track staff time savings, patient portal adoption rates, and digital communication volumes to understand how patient engagement systems are transforming their operations and patient interactions.

Integration with Electronic Health Records

Seamless integration between patient engagement systems and electronic health record platforms creates unified workflows that benefit both patients and healthcare providers. When patient engagement systems connect directly with EHR systems, patient-generated data from remote monitoring devices, symptom tracking applications, and patient-reported outcomes automatically populate clinical records, providing physicians with more complete pictures of their patients’ health status between visits. This integration eliminates manual data entry requirements while ensuring that all patient interactions and health information are properly documented in the medical record.

Interoperability between patient engagement systems and EHR platforms enables real-time updates to patient information, ensuring that patients always have access to their most current lab results, medication changes, and care plan updates through their engagement platforms. Clinical decision support tools can leverage patient engagement data to provide physicians with alerts about medication adherence issues, concerning symptom reports, or gaps in preventive care that patients have reported through their engagement platforms. This integrated approach creates more efficient clinical workflows while supporting better-informed clinical decision-making.

When specialists, primary care physicians, and other healthcare team members all have access to patient engagement data within their familiar EHR interfaces, they can better coordinate care plans and ensure consistent patient communication. Integration also supports population health management initiatives by enabling healthcare organizations to analyze patient engagement patterns across different patient populations and identify opportunities for targeted outreach and intervention programs.

What are the 5 Stages of Patient Engagement Framework?

November 29, 2024
Erik Kangas

The patient engagement framework consists of five progressive stages: inform, consult, involve, collaborate, and empower. This approach helps healthcare organizations build stronger relationships with patients while improving health outcomes. The framework guides providers in developing communication strategies, technological tools, and care processes that move patients from passive recipients of care to active partners in their health management.

Patient Engagement Framework Foundations

The patient engagement framework builds upon healthcare’s evolution toward more patient-centered care models. This structured approach acknowledges that patients have varying levels of activation and readiness to participate in their healthcare decisions. The framework helps organizations assess their current engagement practices and develop strategies for improvement. Healthcare providers use these stages to map communication approaches and technology implementations that support increasing patient participation. Each stage of the patient engagement framework requires different tools, processes, and organizational capabilities. Understanding these elements helps healthcare organizations develop realistic roadmaps for advancing their engagement efforts.

Stage One: Inform

The first stage of the patient engagement framework focuses on providing patients with clear, accessible health information. At this level, communication flows primarily from provider to patient through educational materials, discharge instructions, and basic health literacy resources. Organizations develop content in multiple formats and languages to accommodate diverse patient populations. Digital patient portals typically begin at this stage with features like lab result viewing and appointment scheduling. Healthcare teams establish consistent messaging across departments to avoid confusing or contradicting information. While this stage is the beginning of the patient engagement framework, many organizations struggle to advance past informing patients about their conditions and treatments.

Stage Two: Consult

The consultation stage of the patient engagement framework opens two-way communication channels between providers and patients. Healthcare teams seek patient input about symptoms, preferences, and treatment experiences through surveys, feedback forms, and structured conversations. Providers begin recognizing patients as valuable sources of information about their own health situations. Digital tools expand to include secure messaging and symptom reporting capabilities. Care teams develop protocols for responding to patient communications within appropriate timeframes. The consultation phase of the patient engagement framework begins establishing the base for more collaborative relationships while still maintaining traditional healthcare hierarchies. Organizations generally measure success at this stage through patient satisfaction metrics and communication response rates.

Stage Three: Involve

The third stage of the patient engagement framework actively involves patients in treatment planning and health monitoring. Patients participate in goal-setting discussions and receive tools for tracking health metrics between appointments. Healthcare teams incorporate patient preferences and priorities when developing care plans. Technology platforms introduce self-management tools and educational resources tailored to individual health conditions. Care protocols expand to include regular check-ins and progress evaluations beyond scheduled appointments. The involvement stage of the patient engagement framework marks a significant shift toward recognizing patients as active participants rather than passive recipients.

Stage Four: Collaborate

Collaboration represents the fourth stage in the patient engagement framework, where patients function as true partners in their care team. Health professionals and patients make treatment decisions jointly, weighing clinical evidence alongside patient goals and preferences. Healthcare systems establish patient advisory councils to inform organizational policies and program development. Technology platforms integrate patient-generated health data with clinical systems to create comprehensive health pictures. Team-based care models include patients in case conferences and care planning sessions. The collaborative stage of the patient engagement framework requires organizational culture changes that value patient perspectives alongside clinical expertise. Healthcare systems reaching this stage often demonstrate better care coordination and reduced unnecessary utilization.

Stage Five: Empower

The final stage of the patient engagement framework focuses on empowering patients to manage their health independently when appropriate. Patients receive comprehensive tools and knowledge to make informed healthcare decisions aligned with their personal values. Organizations support patient autonomy while maintaining appropriate clinical oversight for complex conditions. Technology platforms provide personalized insights and recommendations based on individual health patterns. Care teams function as coaches and consultants rather than directing all aspects of patient care. The empowerment phase of the patient engagement framework acknowledges patients as the primary drivers of their health management with healthcare providers serving supportive roles.

Implementing the Patient Engagement Framework

Healthcare organizations implement the patient engagement framework through gradual, strategic changes to clinical processes, technology systems, and organizational culture. Leadership commitment proves essential for allocating necessary resources and championing patient-centered approaches. Staff training addresses both technical skills and communication methods appropriate for each engagement stage. Technology selection focuses on tools that can evolve alongside advancing engagement capabilities. Progress measurement includes both process indicators and outcome metrics tied to each framework stage. Organizations typically find that different service lines and patient populations may operate at different engagement levels simultaneously, requiring flexible implementation approaches. The patient engagement framework provides a roadmap while allowing organizations to adapt implementation to their unique circumstances and patient populations.

Understanding Business Associate Agreements (BAAs) and Shared Responsibility

September 9, 2025
Pete Wermter

Modern-day healthcare organizations rely on a growing array of partners and vendors to provide them with the tools they need to effectively serve patients and customers.

However, while new digital solutions and healthcare ecosystems often result in greater productivity and efficiency, they also increase the number of third parties a company must communicate with and share protected health information (PHI), requiring a business associate agreement (BAA). Unfortunately, this increases the risk of PHI being exposed, as it increases a healthcare organization’s supply chain network and the number of external organizations with access to their data, significantly raising the risk of a security breach.

This is where the concept of shared responsibility comes in.

In this article, we explore the shared responsibility model for data security, explaining the concept, the role of a BAA in shared responsibility, and why healthcare companies need to know how it works and where it factors into their HIPAA compliance efforts.

What Is The Shared Responsibility Model?

Shared responsibility is a core data security principle that divides the responsibility for protecting data between a company that collects the data and a vendor that supplies the infrastructure or systems used to process said data.

The shared responsibility model grew in prominence as more companies moved to cloud-based environments and applications. In the past, when companies kept their systems and data onsite, they had more control over who could access their data and, subsequently, a better ability to mitigate data security risks.

However, in adopting cloud-based infrastructure and applications, companies have to process and store their data in the cloud – often in shared infrastructure with other vendors using the same cloud – which consequently shifts some of the responsibility of information security to the cloud service provider (CSP) itself. This marked a profound shift in the way data was handled, transmitted, and stored – necessitating an evolved approach to data security.

This fundamental shift in the way companies consume infrastructure and use apps ushered in the shared responsibility model: Where the cloud vendor provides the infrastructure or application, including HIPAA compliant and high secure environments, but it’s still the responsibility of the client to configure and use it securely.

Business Associate Agreements (BAAs) and Shared Responsibility

By detailing the respective responsibilities of healthcare companies or Covered Entities (CEs) and their vendors or Business Associates (BAs) in securing PHI, a Business Associate Agreement is a prime example of shared responsibility.

For example, the Business Associate shoulders the responsibility of providing the data safeguards required by HIPAA to secure patient data, such as infrastructure, encryption, audit logging, and even physical onsite security.

The Covered Entity, meanwhile, is responsible for conducting risk assessments, defining access control policies and processes, configuring services accordingly, workforce training, and continuous monitoring.

Additionally, both parties have the obligation to report security incidents to each other, as well as being independently accountable to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Why Shared Responsibility Is Essential for HIPAA Compliance

For healthcare companies, having a firm grasp of the shared responsibility model for safeguarding and securing PHI, and how they fit within your overall security posture is essential (for two key reasons).

Security Gaps

Firstly, clearly understanding the shared responsibility decreases the likelihood of security gaps. If CEs are under the impression that the vendor handles all aspects of data security, they won’t be as vigilant. They’ll be less inclined to configure services, educate their staff accordingly, pay appropriate attention to vendor security alerts, etc.

But the same is also true for BAs: If they assume their client does most of the heavy lifting in securing the data disclosed to them, they could be remiss in their duties to protect it. Without shared responsibility, each side simply assumes the other is covering a safeguard, opening the door for security gaps that malicious actors can exploit.

Fortunately, by detailing both parties’ (CEs and BAs) responsibilities and liabilities regarding data protection, a BAA removes this ambiguity and, more importantly, reduces the risk of security gaps. It’s critical to know the details and work with vendors building products for compliance versus implementing a tick-box approach to compliance that places too much burden on the CE.

Covered Entities (CEs) Are Ultimately Accountable

Subsequently, the second reason why it’s essential for CEs to understand the shared responsibility model, and increase their cybersecurity readiness accordingly, is that it’s the CE that’s ultimately held accountable for data breaches.

Mistakenly thinking that a BAA automatically makes them compliant may result in healthcare companies underinvesting in training, monitoring, and incident response. Conversely, understanding that even with a BAA in place, they’re the ones primarily accountable for protecting PHI gives them a greater sense of urgency to properly implement HIPAA compliant security measures.

The Covered Entity’s Role Within Shared Responsibility

Let’s look at the ways that healthcare companies have to hold up their end in the shared responsibility model.

Choose Compliance-Conscious Vendors

First and foremost, companies have to choose the right vendors to supply them with HIPAA compliant services and solutions.

Look for companies that market themselves as HIPAA compliant and display a detailed understanding of HIPAA requirements, particularly the HIPAA Security Rule. Do your due diligence and perform deeper dives on potential vendors, researching their stated security features, reviews from existing clients, whether they have certifications like HITRUST – and if they’ve been involved in any data breaches.

Naturally, a core prerequisite of being a HIPAA compliant vendor is being willing to sign a BAA, so you can immediately rule out any vendors not willing to do so. For instance, some healthcare companies may assume they can use widely adopted solutions such as SendGrid, Mailchimp, but they don’t offer a BAA.

Once you’ve confirmed a vendor offers a BAA, look through it to establish its terms and determine if it covers the services you’re interested in.

Configuration

Another core component of shared responsibility is comprehensive configuration management. While the BA’s responsibility is to provide a secure solution that satisfies HIPAA requirements, it’s the CE’s responsibility to configure it securely to fit within their IT ecosystem.

Features that often require configuration include:

Access control: Role-based access, Zero Trust, Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA).
Encryption settings: Enabling encryption, choosing encryption type, enforcing forced TLS, enabling storage encryption.
Feature restrictions: Disabling default configurations that enable integration with non-compliant tools.
Audit logging: Enabling audit logging and configuring log formats.
Retention settings: How long to retain audit logs and who is permitted to review them.

Finally, establishing a patch management strategy, i.e., when and how your organization applies software updates, is an important element of configuration. While the vendor must release updates to fix security vulnerabilities discovered in their solutions, it’s up to healthcare companies to deploy the patches.

Training

Regardless of how many security features a vendor bakes into their solutions, once deployed by a healthcare company, the tool is only as secure as the practices of their least security-conscious employee. Consequently, companies must train their staff on how to properly use a solution to process protected health information and sensitive data. The more an employee is required to handle PHI, the more thorough and frequent their training should be.

Key aspects of comprehensive cybersecurity training include:

Common cyber threats: what the most prevalent cyber threats are and how to recognize them.
Incident response: how to report a suspected security incident, i.e., who to contact and when.
Specific solution training: how to securely use systems that process PHI
Scope awareness: knowing which services within your organization’s IT ecosystem are HIPAA-compliant and which are not

Reporting

Although both healthcare companies and BAs have notification obligations to the HHS in the event of a data breach involving PHI, it’s the CE that bears most of the investigative burden.

Firstly, while a BA may report a security incident, it’s the CE’s responsibility to conduct a risk assessment to determine the probability of compromise of PHI, assess risk, and determine whether an official notification of a breach to HHS is necessary.

Secondly, BAs must notify the CE without unreasonable delay and no later than 60 days after discovery. Although BAs often wait to complete internal investigations before notifying the CE, the CE’s 60-day clock starts upon the BA’s discovery, not upon the BA’s report. Therefore, BA delays can create compliance risks for the CE.

To prevent this, where possible, you can include stricter contractual reporting timelines in the BAAs. This constantly keeps your company in the loop, ensuring you have sufficient lead time to complete your own investigations and your HIPAA-regulated deadlines.

LuxSci – Secure Healthcare Communications

Developed specifically to fulfil the stringent regulatory and ever-evolving data security needs of the healthcare sector, LuxSci’s secure email, text, marketing and forms solutions help companies protect PHI and personalize communications.

Equally as importantly, instead of leaving you to “figure it out” – pushing additional responsibility back onto your company – LuxSci has a reputation for the best customer support in the business, offering onboarding, detailed documentation, secure default configurations, and ongoing support to help navigate the murky waters of HIPAA compliance, while getting best-in-class performance out of your solution.

Contact LuxSci today to learn more or get a demo.