The Complete Guide to FHIR in Healthcare: Architecture, Use Cases, and Implementation

December 5, 2025 admin FHIR

Healthcare data interoperability has evolved dramatically over the past decades. The Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources standard, developed by HL7 International, represents the latest generation of standards enabling seamless, API-based exchange of health information. FHIR combines structured data models with modern web technologies to meet the needs of today’s digital health systems. It builds on earlier HL7 standards by adopting a modular, web-centric architecture that is easier for developers and implementers to use. As a result, FHIR is now the de facto global standard for health data exchange.

FHIR is widely used by a broad range of stakeholders to streamline interoperability, improve workflows, and gain data insights. It is based on familiar internet standards, lowering the barrier for developers and facilitating faster, real-time integration. Unlike legacy formats, FHIR data is stored and transferred as discrete, computable objects rather than monolithic documents, allowing applications to access individual record elements on demand. FHIR’s emphasis on reuse and composability promotes consistency: each resource contains only the data elements needed by most use cases, with extensions available for specialized needs.

Key aspects of the FHIR framework

Resources: Standardized data models for clinical concepts (Patient, Observation, Medication, etc.), each defined with a clear schema.
RESTful APIs: Well-defined HTTP-based interfaces (GET, POST, PUT, DELETE, etc.) for exchanging resources over the web.
Data Formats: Support for common formats (JSON, XML, RDF), enabling broad compatibility.
Terminology Binding: Use of established code systems (SNOMED CT, LOINC, ICD, etc.) to ensure semantic interoperability.
Profiles/IGs: The ability to create Implementation Guides (IGs) or “profiles” that constrain resources for specific national or use-case requirements.

These components work together to form a flexible interoperability architecture. FHIR addresses the needs of healthcare IT by decoupling data models from exchange methods: resources capture the “what” (data), while RESTful APIs handle the “how” (exchange). As HL7 describes, “FHIR contains two primary components: Resources (information models) and APIs (interfaces for interoperability)”. In practical terms, this means a FHIR server can host a variety of resources (e.g. patients, conditions, lab results), and external systems can read or update them via standard HTTP calls.

The FHIR framework is organized into functional domains (modules). For example, HL7 notes that FHIR includes foundational resources and modules for administration, data exchange, and clinical reasoning (the latter covering decision support and quality measures). This layered design allows implementers to pick the parts relevant to their needs. For instance, a clinical app may only use the core data exchange modules, while a quality measurement system leverages the Clinical Reasoning module.

FHIR Data Model and APIs

At the core of FHIR is its resource-based data model. Each resource represents a specific concept or “business object” in healthcare (such as a Patient, Practitioner, Observation, Encounter, or Medication). Resources are defined with standard fields, data types, and relationships. For example, the Patient resource includes demographic details and identifiers, while Observation covers measurements like lab results. The HL7 specification emphasizes that resources are notionally equivalent to a physical model implemented in XML or JSON. In other words, the formal resource definitions translate directly into the schemas used on the wire.

FHIR resources are inherently modular and composable. Many resources can reference or embed others, allowing complex clinical scenarios to be built from simpler pieces. For example, an Encounter resource can reference a Patient and a Location. To maintain a lean design, each resource’s core definition only includes elements needed by most users (~80% rule); any additional or regional requirements are handled by extensions or profiles. This balance of standardization and flexibility is one of FHIR’s strengths: it promotes wide interoperability but still allows customization for local needs.

FHIR data exchange uses standard web APIs. The most common approach is RESTful interaction over HTTP. Systems can perform operations like GET /Patient/123 to retrieve a patient, or POST /Observation to create a new observation. Search operations (e.g. GET /Observation?code=…&subject=Patient/123) allow clients to find matching resources. These RESTful calls are authenticated and authorized typically via OAuth2/OpenID Connect (often using the SMART on FHIR framework for apps).

Importantly, FHIR APIs also support batch and transaction operations, as well as bulk data exports (see later). The standard defines operations like $export for population-level queries, and $everything to fetch all data for a patient. There are also terminology services (e.g. $translate, $validate-code) to handle coded data. Profiled FHIR servers may enforce IG-specific operations as well. For developers, the REST/JSON model means that web and mobile apps can be built using familiar tools, reducing integration time.

Security and data governance are critical. By default, FHIR assumes data in transit is secured (e.g. HTTPS). OAuth2 provides scoped access – for example, an app may be granted read-only access to a patient’s allergy and medication data. SMART on FHIR specifically defines an authentication flow for apps to launch with context (patient ID, user identity) and obtain access tokens. The SMART framework essentially combines FHIR with OpenID Connect, ensuring apps can request just the privileges they need. Overall, FHIR’s use of industry-standard security protocols (TLS, OAuth2) means it can fit into modern healthcare security architectures.

Related: Leveraging FHIR Subscription APIs for Real-Time Patient Monitoring and Alerts

FHIR vs. Legacy Healthcare Standards

FHIR did not emerge in a vacuum – it evolved to address limitations of earlier healthcare data formats. Comparing FHIR to older standards highlights why it has become so widely adopted:

HL7 v2

The most entrenched standard in hospitals, HL7 V2 is a messaging format (pipe-delimited text) dating from the late 1980s. It’s deployed in 95% of U.S. hospitals and many organizations worldwide. However, HL7 V2 suffers from fragmentation: each vendor or hospital often implements custom “dialects” with different segment usage, making integration brittle. Real-time use is limited (V2 is often used in batch interfaces), and development requires specialized expertise. In contrast, FHIR uses modern HTTP/JSON, provides clear schemas, and has a smaller learning curve.

HL7 v3 / CDA

HL7’s version 3 and Clinical Document Architecture (CDA) aimed for more consistent semantics via a formal Reference Information Model. In practice, V3 is used primarily for documents like CCD/C-CDA, exchanged through IHE XDS or similar. These CDA documents are verbose XML files (often tens of pages) passed between systems. FHIR replaces many CDA use cases with granular APIs: instead of sharing entire documents, systems can query specific FHIR resources. This makes data access more flexible. For example, instead of receiving a whole continuity of care document, an app can query GET /Observation?patient=123&code=59408-5 to get just blood pressure readings. FHIR can still represent documents (the Composition resource), but its API approach is generally lighter weight.

IHE Profiles

Organizations like IHE have built profiles (e.g. XDS for document sharing, PDQ/PIX for patient ID, SAML for identity). FHIR overlaps or replaces many IHE-based exchanges. For example, where XDS puts documents on a registry, FHIR Bulk Data can export datasets more straightforwardly. FHIR also has a Patient resource, so a standardized Global Patient ID is intrinsic. Legacy mechanisms like MLLP (a minimal TCP protocol used by HL7 v2) are no longer needed with FHIR’s web orientation. In short, FHIR unifies many prior mechanisms into one framework of RESTful APIs.

Imaging (DICOM)

The DICOM standard still governs medical imaging formats and communication. FHIR does not replace DICOM but complements it: the ImagingStudy and DiagnosticReport resources in FHIR can reference or include imaging data, and integrate image metadata with other patient data. Many imaging systems now offer FHIR endpoints for metadata and reports, while images themselves remain DICOM.

Terminology Standards (SNOMED, LOINC, ICD, etc.)

These are semantic standards, not data exchange formats. FHIR does not replace them; rather, it binds to them. For example, a FHIR Observation’s code might use a LOINC value, and diagnoses in a FHIR Condition use ICD-10 codes. In this sense, FHIR supports existing terminologies (ensuring semantic interoperability) but provides the transport and data structure.

OpenEHR and others

OpenEHR (ISO 13606) is another data standard focused on detailed clinical modelling. OpenEHR uses “archetypes” for deep, computable clinical content. By contrast, FHIR’s resource-based approach is more lightweight and developer-friendly. OpenEHR excels at semantic depth, whereas FHIR excels at API simplicity and broad adoption. In some architectures, the two are used together (e.g. openEHR for core recordkeeping, with FHIR interfaces layered on top).

Related: Designing a Central Interoperability Hub: HL7 v2, FHIR, CCD, and Direct Messaging

Global Adoption and Policy Landscape

FHIR’s reach is truly global and growing. According to the 2025 State of FHIR survey by HL7 International and Firely, over 70% of countries report some active FHIR use in at least a few use cases. The survey (covering 52 countries) found 71% of respondents confirming FHIR deployment in their nation. Another highlight: FHIR Version R4 is the predominant release in 31 countries, though newer versions (R4B, R5) are gaining traction.

The chart above illustrates the global FHIR version landscape: R4 remains dominant, but many implementers are beginning to adopt R4B and R5. This diversity of versions is a known implementation challenge, underscoring the need for clear upgrade strategies.

Policy and Mandates

Regulatory frameworks are a major driver of FHIR adoption. In 2025, 78% of surveyed countries had electronic health exchange regulations in place, and of those, 73% mandated or encouraged FHIR use. For example, the United States’ 21st Century Cures Act and CMS interoperability rules explicitly require FHIR APIs for patient data access and prior authorization.

The U.S. “Patient Access” rule (CMS-9115-F) mandates that certified EHRs provide standardized FHIR endpoints for patient data. Similarly, the CMS “Prior Authorization” rule (CMS-0057-F) expects FHIR-based workflows to automate exchanges between providers and payers.

However, enforcement varies by country. The Firely survey notes that while many nations have FHIR-related regulations, only ~50% include firm compliance deadlines and a mere 12–16% impose penalties for non-adoption.

In practice, this means FHIR is encouraged but often softly enforced in many regions, with concrete incentives or mandates stronger in places like the U.S., Israel, India, and parts of Europe.

Country and Regional Examples

A diverse set of countries has national FHIR initiatives. Prominent examples include:

United States: The ONC/CMS rules have made FHIR mandatory for patient apps and for payers/providers exchange. Major EHR vendors offer FHIR APIs. Apple’s Health Records feature on iPhone uses FHIR to pull data from hundreds of U.S. health systems. Federal projects like NIH’s All of Us use FHIR for research data interoperability.
European Union: The EU’s “MyHealth@EU” cross-border eHealth infrastructure is built on FHIR. Individual countries have deployed national FHIR APIs. The OECD’s FICare uses FHIR IGs across borders. The Netherlands and the UK have created FHIR profiles/IGs for their national health data models.
United Kingdom: NHS England has defined NHS Core FHIR profiles covering common data and rolled out API platforms for GP systems using FHIR R4. The NHS App and national integrations rely on FHIR.
Australia: Australia’s My Health Record and state systems have adopted FHIR for data exchange. The Australian Digital Health Agency publishes FHIR IGs for various clinical scenarios.
Canada: Provincial health record initiatives and the pan-Canadian EHR Blueprint include FHIR, and Canada HL7 publishes FHIR IGs.
Asia/Pacific: Countries like India and Israel have national plans centered on FHIR. South Korea and Singapore have also launched FHIR-based infrastructures for data sharing. Saudi Arabia and the UAE are rapidly implementing FHIR under government digital health strategies.
Cross-Border: The HL7 International International Patient Access IG provides a standard framework so that any country can enable its citizens to retrieve their own health data via FHIR APIs. Several nations participate in IPA, reflecting a move towards global patient mobility.

These trends show that FHIR is not just a U.S. phenomenon, it is becoming a cornerstone of digital health worldwide.

FHIR Implementation Examples

FHIR’s flexibility means it can be used in countless ways. Below are representative use cases and real-world implementations across the healthcare ecosystem:

Patient Data Access & Personal Health Apps

FHIR’s Patient and related resources enable patient-facing apps to query all of a patient’s records.
In the U.S., apps certified under the ONC program use SMART on FHIR to let patients see their records from any participating hospital.
For example, CMS’s Blue Button 2.0 service provides Medicare claims data via a FHIR API to approved apps.
Similarly, Apple’s Health Records uses FHIR to import hospital data into the iPhone Health app.
In each case, a FHIR server behind the scenes exposes patient demographics, lab results, immunizations, allergies, etc., through standardized endpoints.

Related: How to Achieve Seamless FHIR Integration for Mobile Health Apps

Provider-to-Provider Exchange and Health Information Exchange (HIE)

Hospitals and clinics use FHIR to share clinical summaries and updates.
For instance, a hospital EHR may send a FHIR Encounter or Observation to a community HIE for local availability.
The Dutch “Logius” network uses FHIR to exchange discharge summaries among care providers.
In emergency care, paramedic apps can push patient vitals (as FHIR Observations) to the admitting ED’s FHIR server.

Clinical Decision Support (CDS)

FHIR greatly simplifies CDS implementations.
Tools like CDS Hooks leverage FHIR to provide real-time decision support within workflows.
For example, when a doctor prescribes a medication, a CDS Hook could send the patient’s demographics and existing med list to a rule engine and return alerts.
InterSystems notes that embedding CDS into EHR is much easier with FHIR, because you can send real-time patient data to external services and receive coded recommendations.
FHIR also supports encoding of decision support rules and shareable artifacts.

Payer/Provider Workflows and Prior Authorization

The Da Vinci Project, a U.S. HL7 initiative, has created FHIR-based IGs to automate payer-provider data exchange.
For instance, in prior authorization, a provider can use a FHIR PriorAuth resource to send needed clinical info to a payer.
The payer’s system can then respond via FHIR with status updates or requirements.
This replaces faxed forms with machine-driven FHIR messaging, speeding approval.
InterSystems specifically highlights FHIR for “Provider-payer data exchange and CMS prior authorization compliance”.

Public Health and Population Health

FHIR is increasingly used for reporting and surveillance.
Public health agencies can subscribe to FHIR Observations from hospitals via FHIR Subscriptions or bulk export.
The HL7 PHIN has adoption paths to ingest FHIR data. Research consortia use FHIR to aggregate de-identified patient data for studies.
For example, the MIMIC-IV database for ICU outcomes could be exposed as FHIR resources to facilitate FAIR data queries.
Bulk Data Access is a new IG for large-scale analytics, allowing authorized entities to download entire population datasets in FHIR format.

Clinical Trials and Research

Life science companies use FHIR to recruit patients and share data with clinical sites.
A hospital might allow researchers to query aggregated Observation records for eligible subjects via a FHIR ResearchStudy or Consent resource.
Genomic and lab data can be represented in FHIR (e.g. MolecularSequence, DiagnosticReport) and exchanged between research databases.
InterSystems specifically mentions FHIR speeding up clinical trials by “seamlessly sharing patient data for recruitment and analysis”.

Chronic Disease Management and Remote Monitoring

FHIR enables IoT and remote monitoring. Patient devices (glucose monitors, fitness trackers) can generate FHIR Observations or DeviceMetrics that sync to cloud servers.
Care management apps can pull this data via FHIR APIs to adjust care plans.
For example, a diabetes app could feed home glucose readings (FHIR Observation) into an EHR or a patient’s personal record.
InterSystems cites “telemedicine and remote monitoring” as a FHIR use case, noting that providers can receive home-care device data via secure FHIR channels.

Mobile Health Apps

The SMART on FHIR framework has spawned numerous health apps (see the SMART App Gallery).
By using FHIR, these apps can run “substitutably” on any compliant EHR platform.
Use cases include medication lists, care navigation apps, and patient education tools.
InterSystems points out that US federal rules require EHRs to connect with SMART on FHIR apps, enabling a mobile-friendly ecosystem.

Medical Imaging Context

While actual images use DICOM, FHIR is used to handle imaging metadata and reports.
For instance, FHIR ImagingStudy or ImagingManifest resources can list images (by DICOM URL or identifier) for consumption by applications.
Radiology reporting may use FHIR DiagnosticReport to integrate with structured data.
Some institutions use FHIR to coordinate radiology workflows (e.g. orders and results) alongside their main imaging systems.

Healthcare Analytics and AI

Cloud AI platforms integrate with FHIR data stores.
For example, Google Cloud Healthcare API and Azure API for FHIR allow health systems to store EHR data in a FHIR store, then apply machine learning or BI tools on it.
This lets data scientists run predictive analytics on clinical resources.
AWS HealthLake provides NLP processing to convert unstructured text into FHIR-coded data.
In all these cases, FHIR serves as the lingua franca, making it easier to plug in AI models to live clinical data.

In practice, all major EHRs and health IT vendors support FHIR today. Epic, Cerner, Allscripts, NextGen, and others offer FHIR endpoints covering the US Core Data set and beyond.

Open-source EHRs and integration engines have FHIR modules. Moreover, each year, dozens of new FHIR Implementation Guides emerge to tackle specific domains: for example, HL7 has IGs for genomics, SMART Care Plan, gravity, etc. Countries and vendors maintain their own IGs so that FHIR can solve very targeted problems while still leveraging the shared resource definitions.

FHIR Architecture in Practice

The architecture of a FHIR-based system typically centers around a FHIR server. Client applications and other services interact with this server. The server implements authentication/authorization and exposes endpoints for each resource type. It may store data in a relational database, NoSQL store, or specialized FHIR datastore.

The figure above illustrates a representative FHIR-enabled architecture from cloud providers. Key components often include:

API Gateway / Server Endpoint: A managed FHIR API provides scalability and a standardized entry point.
Authentication (OAuth2/OpenID): Inbound requests are secured using protocols like OAuth2 or OpenID Connect to ensure only authorized parties can access patient data.
FHIR Server Core: The central system that processes requests and enforces FHIR rules. It validates incoming and outgoing data against FHIR schemas and profiles. Examples include open-source servers like HAPI FHIR JPA Server, Firely’s .NET FHIR Server, or commercial servers.
Data Store / Systems of Record: The FHIR server typically reads from and writes to underlying systems. Data mapping may be required if the source uses proprietary schemas. Some FHIR servers directly use FHIR-aware storage.
Transformations/Middleware: If data resides in legacy formats, an ETL or integration layer converts it to FHIR resources. This could be middleware that listens for HL7v2 messages and upserts FHIR entries.
FHIR Clients: Applications or users that query the FHIR API. These might be clinical dashboards, mobile patient apps, analytics jobs, or other systems. They authenticate and then perform RESTful calls to fetch or update resources.

This architecture is inherently stateless, which aids scalability. It also aligns with best practices: traffic can be load-balanced across multiple FHIR servers, and databases can scale horizontally if needed. Because FHIR resources are lean by design, even mobile or bandwidth-constrained environments can work effectively.

Implementation Steps and Best Practices

Implementing FHIR in an organization requires careful planning. Some key steps and considerations include:

Assess Use Cases and Scope

Identify what data needs to be shared and with whom (patients, other providers, payers). Focus on high-value initial use cases (e.g. patient access APIs, discharge summaries). InterSystems recommends starting with top priorities like patient portals or critical workflows.

Establish Governance and Standards Compliance

Define which FHIR version and profiles will be used (for example, US Core R4). Ensure alignment with national IGs or relevant certification criteria. HL7’s survey notes that while many countries have IGs, few are fully leveraged, real progress often requires active adoption and harmonization of these guides.

Select Tools and Platform

Choose a FHIR server implementation and hosting environment. Major cloud providers offer managed FHIR services (Google Cloud Healthcare, Azure API for FHIR, AWS HealthLake) that simplify security and scaling. Alternatively, deploy FHIR servers on-premises using containers or virtual machines. Middleware tools (e.g. integration engines like Mirth Connect, Rhapsody) often have FHIR capabilities for bridging data from legacy systems.

Data Mapping and Transformation

Identify source data (EHR records, lab systems, etc.) and map it to FHIR resources. This often involves converting formats (HL7v2 messages → FHIR), normalizing codes, and ensuring referential integrity (linking a lab result to the correct patient and encounter). Tools like CQL and Argo FHIR tools can assist. Profiles (IG constraints) may need mapping rules or extensions if the source data lacks certain fields.

Implement APIs and Workflows

Develop or configure the REST endpoints. If using an existing FHIR server product, much of the API logic is built in; developers primarily set up security and data persistence. For custom setups, implement the necessary FHIR operations for each resource, handling create, read, update, delete, and search semantics. SMART on FHIR apps will need launch endpoints following the SMART specification. Testing is critical: use HL7’s FHIR test suites or tools like the Touchstone validator to ensure compliance with the FHIR spec and IG requirements.

Security and Privacy

Apply OAuth2 scopes rigorously. For example, an app might only have patient/Observation.read or similar scopes. Use TLS for all connections. Implement audit logging to record access to sensitive data (PHI). Remember that patient data is protected by laws (HIPAA, GDPR, etc.), so ensure consent management and data minimization as needed.

Pilot and Iterate

Begin with a limited deployment or pilot involving a small number of clients or hospitals. Gather feedback, measure performance, and fix issues. The transition is often iterative: many organizations maintain legacy HL7 interfaces in parallel while gradually increasing FHIR usage. The “transition to FHIR” may take months or years, with middleware bridging the gap in the interim.

Maintain and Upgrade

Plan for version upgrades (e.g. moving from R4 to R5). Keep up with new FHIR releases and IG updates. Monitor implementations against certification rules (in the US, certified health IT must maintain API conformance). Provide developer documentation for external users and update it as profiles evolve.

Throughout, collaboration with standards bodies and other implementers is beneficial. Many organizations participate in connectathons and implementation communities (like HL7 FHIR Connectathons) to solve common challenges together.

Use Cases and Benefits

FHIR’s versatile architecture leads to a variety of tangible benefits:

Real-Time Data Access: Because FHIR uses RESTful queries, data can be retrieved on demand. Clinicians no longer have to wait for batch reports; they can query a patient’s record at the point of care in real time. For example, in an emergency, a physician can fetch a patient’s medication list instantly via GET /MedicationRequest?patient=Patient/123 instead of waiting hours for an interface message.
Reduced Integration Complexity: The reuse/composability of FHIR means many systems can share the same resource definitions. A single FHIR Observation model works for labs, vitals, and sensor data alike, simplifying mapping work. Additionally, by using standard APIs, developers avoid building custom interfaces for each point-to-point exchange. This reduces costs and errors.
Enhanced Innovation: With FHIR, third-party app developers can build plugins or standalone apps that run across multiple EHRs. The SMART on FHIR model has enabled marketplaces of certified health apps. This fosters innovation without each provider having to build everything in-house.
Interdisciplinary Data Sharing: FHIR can break down silos between clinical, billing, research, and population health data. For example, genomic sequencing results can be represented in FHIR alongside clinical data, facilitating precision medicine. Social determinants of health can be encoded as FHIR Observations and shared between social services and healthcare providers.
Regulatory Compliance: By adhering to FHIR standards, organizations can more easily comply with government regulations. In the U.S., for instance, using the mandated US Core profiles and the SMART framework directly satisfies the Cures Act requirements. Similarly, if a country mandates a FHIR-based national EHR exchange, using FHIR APIs means meeting that mandate out of the box.
Global Interoperability: Since FHIR is an international standard, data exchanged across borders can use common structures. Programs like HL7’s IPA aim to make it straightforward for a patient’s record in one country to be read in another, using standardized FHIR interfaces.

Challenges and Considerations

No technology is without hurdles. Key challenges in FHIR implementation include:

Version Management: With multiple FHIR releases (R4, R4B, R5, etc.), implementers must choose a version and plan for upgrades. The 2025 survey noted that version fragmentation is a concern worldwide. Aligning with partner organizations on a common version is important for interoperability.
Implementation Guide Fragmentation: Though many national or domain-specific IGs exist, the survey found that 79% of countries have an IG, but only ~20% use it widely. This indicates that mere publication of guides isn’t enough – active engagement and tooling are needed. Organizations may struggle if trading partners use different profiles.
Incomplete Data: FHIR assumes source systems have structured data. In reality, some EHR data may be stored in narrative text or proprietary fields. Transforming that into fully coded FHIR resources can be labor-intensive. For example, mapping a free-text physical exam note into FHIR Observations requires NLP or manual intervention.
Performance and Scale: Although FHIR resources are lean, high-volume use cases (e.g. bulk analytics) require careful design. The Bulk Data API addresses this by streaming large datasets, but not all servers support it natively. Some implementers may need additional caching or data warehousing.
Security Complexity: While FHIR standardizes on OAuth2, correctly configuring scopes and authorizations (especially in distributed, multi-organizational scenarios) can be complex. Ensuring that only the minimum necessary data is exposed to a given client is critical.
Legacy Coexistence: Most health systems will maintain existing HL7 v2/CDA infrastructure for some time. Bridging these with FHIR requires middleware and can double operational overhead during the transition phase.

Despite these challenges, the consensus is that the benefits outweigh the costs. The survey respondents overwhelmingly see strong growth in FHIR adoption in the coming years. The momentum is especially high in regions with active policy support.

Related: 5 Challenges Associated with HL7 FHIR and How CapMinds Helps to Solve

FHIR Interoperability Service: Power Your Healthcare Data Exchange with CapMinds

Implementing FHIR is no longer optional, it’s the foundation of every modern healthcare ecosystem.

At CapMinds, our FHIR implementation services help you streamline interoperability, unlock real-time data access, and build scalable architectures that support your clinical, administrative, and analytics goals.

With deep expertise in FHIR APIs, HL7 integration, EHR connectivity, cloud interoperability, and healthcare data engineering, we deliver end-to-end digital health tech services tailored to your organization.

Our FHIR & Interoperability Services Include:

FHIR Server Setup & Customization
HL7 → FHIR Data Transformation & Mapping
EHR Integration Services (Epic, Cerner, OpenEMR & More)
SMART on FHIR App Development
FHIR Bulk Data & Analytics Enablement
Cloud FHIR Architecture on AWS, Azure & GCP
Ongoing FHIR Support, Monitoring & Version Upgrades

From simplifying provider–payer workflows to enabling patient access apps and multi-system interoperability, CapMinds ensures your FHIR journey is smooth, compliant, and future-ready.

Ready to build a FHIR-powered ecosystem?

Partner with CapMinds for scalable, secure, and standards-driven interoperability services and more.

Contact Us