Industries
Healthcare platforms where the rules are in the architecture.
Patient platforms and clinical data systems where consent, retention and access rules are built into the design — not layered on afterwards as policy and hope.
At a glance
The pressures
What healthcare systems have to reconcile.
These tensions are structural to health technology. An honest architecture starts by naming them rather than designing around the easy case.
Clinical data spread across systems that were never designed to share
Electronic records, imaging, laboratory and scheduling systems each hold part of the patient picture. Interoperability standards exist, but adoption is uneven and much of the estate still exchanges data through flat files.
Consent that has to be honoured, not just recorded
Consent is not a checkbox at registration. It is scoped, it is withdrawable, and it has to be enforced at every point where data is read or shared — including in downstream analytics that nobody had in mind at the time.
Access control at clinical speed
Clinicians need the record in front of them without friction, and the same record must not be broadly readable across the organisation. Reconciling urgency with least privilege is an architectural problem, not a training problem.
Retention and disposal over long horizons
Health records carry retention periods measured in years or decades, varying by record type and jurisdiction. Systems that never delete accumulate risk; systems that delete by ad hoc script accumulate a different one.
What we build
Our services, applied to healthcare.
The same engineering practice we bring to any regulated enterprise, shaped by the sensitivity of the data involved.
Patient platforms and clinical integration
Patient-facing services and the integration layer beneath them — identity, appointments, records access — built against interoperability standards rather than bespoke file exchanges.
Security architecture for PHI
Access models, encryption and logging designed around protected health information, so least-privilege access and full auditability are properties of the platform rather than operational discipline.
Clinical data platforms
Data platforms where consent scope, retention class and access rules travel with the record — so analytics and reporting inherit the same constraints as the source system.
Applied AI under clinical governance
Triage support, document extraction and operational forecasting, scoped so a clinician remains the decision-maker and so every model input and output is attributable and reviewable.
Governance context
Standards your organisation is held to.
We do not hold these certifications on your behalf. Our work is to design controls against these standards and produce the evidence your organisation needs to demonstrate them.
HIPAA safeguards
HIPAA sets administrative, physical and technical safeguards for protected health information. We architect and document those technical controls — access, audit, integrity, transmission security — so your organisation can evidence them; the compliance posture remains yours.
Consent management
Consent has scope, duration and a withdrawal path. We model it as enforceable state that every read and every downstream pipeline checks, rather than as a flag captured once at registration.
Retention schedules
Record-retention obligations vary by record type and jurisdiction. We encode those schedules into storage and archival design so retention and disposal are executed and evidenced by the platform.
Least-privilege access to PHI
Access should be granted by role and by purpose, scoped to the care relationship, and reviewed. We design the authorisation model and the review mechanics that make that workable at clinical speed.
Auditability of every access
In health data, reading a record is itself an event worth recording. We build audit logging that captures reads as well as writes, retains them appropriately, and makes them queryable when a question is asked.