Advancements in technology continue to revolutionize all aspects of healthcare, including healthcare records management. Among the many technologies that a high-quality technology-conscious healthcare facility should implement is Computer-Assisted Coding software. This software enables quick and efficient management of healthcare documentation, integrating patient data with financial information. As with other initiatives companies implement in the healthcare industry, Computer-Assisted Coding must overcome potential inherent risks and threats. While eliminating all risks and threats is a near impossibility, following the steps outlined in the systems development life cycle (SDLC) could mitigate severe dangers and threats to Computer-Assisted Coding software implementation.
The first phase of the system development lifecycle is needs identification. During this phase, identifying a company’s security needs commences. When identified, the security needs to help draft the system architecture with the impact and mitigation efforts taken into account (Maria & Costas, 2021). This phase is essential in implementing the Computer-Assisted Coding software because it initializes project risk management, enabling managers to prioritize the more severe software implementation risks. Specific tasks include imagining different positive and negative scenarios, identifying critical risks and their origins, and classifying them in their order of severity.
The second phase entails specifying requirements. At this stage, the Computer Assisted Coding software implementation team has chosen the best scenario that optimizes company requirements while keeping risks and threats to the minimum. The potential risks the software must deal with are identified at this phase in addition to other system and hardware specifications. A vivid concept of the complete software together with in-built safeguards against identified potential risks and threats and other systems is conceived in the specifications of the requirement phase. After the success of the first two stages, the team responsible for implementing or acquisition of Computer-Assisted Coding software can proceed to purchase. The CAC software configuration, functional unit creation, testing, and verification are undertaken during this phase (Maria & Costas, 2021). The implementers must then physically realize the imagination into functioning software from a concept imagined in phase two. In actuality, these two stages involve combining the software specifications and security requirements to realize a relatively secure software for the organization. Where the capability to build CAC software is not available, acquisition from a pre-qualified vendor must occur.
The fifth stage involves the maintenance of the CAC software. For the CAC software to function correctly and at the rate envisioned by the implementers, support software such as the natural language processing (NLP) engine must be provided (Maria & Costas, 2021). Personnel with the requisite qualifications for reviewing the codes generated must also be provided. Given the rapid advancements in technology, the company must ensure the latest version of the software is available promptly. Updating CAC offers several benefits, including patching potential vulnerabilities that could be exploited to steal or manipulate client information. Maintenance also includes having backup systems to augment security measures in place. With backup systems, an organization can function without shutting down if the main CAC software is compromised.
Finally, the sixth stage involves monitoring the CAC software (Maria & Costas, 2021). Monitoring consists of measuring the performance of the CAC against set targets and taking corrective actions to ensure performance criteria are met. Where vulnerabilities of security issues are identified due to the monitoring exercise, the optimal alternative is chosen to patch them. Monitoring is not a one-off event, especially where sensitive software such as CAC is involved. The management and officers with particular CAC software knowledge, including external and internal auditors, must monitor its performance to ensure the best possible results and protection.
References
Maria, M., & Costas, L. (2021). Software development lifecycle for survivable mobile telecommunication systems. Advances in Science, Technology and Engineering Systems Journal, 6(4), 259–277. Web.