A Swiss Telemedicine Platform for Hospitals, Cantons and Private Clinics

Telemedicine has become a structural part of healthcare delivery in Switzerland. Patients expect to be able to consult remotely, clinicians want to stay in touch between visits, and health authorities are promoting digital transformation.

For a hospital, a canton or a private clinic, the key question is no longer “should we offer teleconsultations?” but rather “with which platform, under which legal framework, and with what level of control over data and infrastructure?”

With the revised Federal Act on Data Protection (FADP, often referred to in French and German as LPD/DSG) now in force, and with additional information‑security obligations under the Federal Act on Information Security (ISG / ISA) and its amendments for critical infrastructure, the choice of a telemedicine solution can’t be based only on usability or price anymore. 

This article offers some practical reference points for decision‑makers in Swiss healthcare (executive leadership, CIOs, CISOs, DPOs, CMIOs) who want a telemedicine platform that is genuinely compatible with the Swiss regulatory and operational context. It is informational only and does not replace legal advice.

1. The specific challenges of Swiss healthcare institutions

For a hospital or large clinic, telemedicine is not just a video call on a smartphone. It has to integrate into a complex environment:

• hospital information systems (HIS/KIS, EHR/EMR)
• patient portals
• scheduling and resource‑planning systems
• secure messaging (for example HIN)
• cantonal or regional e‑health infrastructures

On top of this, there are strong constraints:

• health data subject to the revised FADP and to cantonal data‑protection laws
• expectations around information security management and incident handling under the Information Security Act and related ordinances for many critical infrastructures
• regular audits, certifications and risk‑management requirements
• IT governance and budgetary limits

A teleconsultation service that works perfectly for a small practice or a start‑up is not necessarily suitable for a hospital network or a cantonal health authority.

2. The limits of “global” teleconsultation platforms

Many popular teleconsultation platforms are designed for mass markets outside Switzerland and hosted abroad. They often provide a pleasant user experience, but they can create problems for Swiss institutions:

• uncertainty about the actual location of data and metadata
• difficulty documenting the full chain of processors and sub‑processors
• media streams (audio/video) and telemetry routed through foreign infrastructures
• business models that rely on data analytics or on licensing models that are hard to adapt to public procurement
• limited or fragile integration with local HIS/EHR systems

For a hospital or canton, this lack of control complicates data‑protection impact assessments, risk management and alignment with FADP/FDPIC guidance and cantonal e‑health strategies.

3. What defines a “Swiss telemedicine platform”?

The term “Swiss telemedicine platform” is sometimes used loosely. From the point of view of hospitals, cantons and private clinics, a platform truly aligned with Swiss expectations should ideally offer at least the following characteristics.

Hosting in Switzerland and data sovereignty

• Primary hosting in Switzerland (Swiss cloud providers or institution‑owned data centres)
• Option for fully on‑premise deployment in sensitive environments
• No uncontrolled transfers of personal data or traffic metadata to third countries, including for observability, support or media routing purposes

Compliance with FADP and data‑governance requirements

The revised FADP, in force since 1 September 2023, strengthens the protection of personal data and introduces stricter requirements on transparency, data minimisation and security, especially for sensitive data such as health information.

A telemedicine platform should support:

• minimisation of collected data and configuration of retention periods
• fine‑grained access controls aligned with clinical roles
• detailed audit logging of access and administrative actions
• clear documentation to support data‑protection impact assessments and internal compliance files

Alignment with information‑security expectations (ISA / ISG)

Although the Federal Act on Information Security is directed mainly at federal authorities and certain critical infrastructures, its principles influence good practice for organisations that want to demonstrate a mature security posture. 

A suitable telemedicine platform should therefore make it easier to:

• integrate with existing identity and access‑management systems (IAM, SSO, HIN, AD/LDAP)
• enforce encryption in transit and at rest
• segment environments (production, test, training)
• export logs and events for security monitoring and incident response

Integration with the existing ecosystem

For hospitals and clinics, a telemedicine solution has to integrate, not stand alone:

• standards‑based APIs or connectors for HIS/EHR systems
• synchronisation of appointments, patient accounts and documents
• support for health‑data standards such as HL7 and FHIR to reduce technological lock‑in

User experience aligned with clinical practice

For clinicians:

• access from within the systems they already use (EHR, clinical portal, scheduling)
• minimal clicks to start or join a consultation
• tools that match real workflows (waiting rooms, hand‑offs, documentation)

For patients:

• clear, simple onboarding via SMS or email links
• mobile‑friendly interface without mandatory app installation if possible
• straightforward presentation of consent and privacy information

4. Self‑hosted telemedicine: a pragmatic approach for Swiss institutions

For many hospitals and clinics, a self‑hosted or locally hosted telemedicine platform is the most coherent option. It allows them to keep infrastructure and data under direct control while still benefitting from modern web technologies.

A platform such as HCW@Home illustrates this approach:

• open‑source software, which makes technical audits and security reviews more transparent
• deployment on servers located exclusively in Switzerland, either on‑premise or in a trusted Swiss cloud
• architecture based on WebRTC and media servers like LiveKit, optimised for medically acceptable video even on constrained networks
• modern APIs and FHIR‑based components that simplify integration with existing systems

This type of solution does not replace the institution’s own compliance work, but it provides a technical foundation that aligns well with Swiss expectations around data sovereignty, security and interoperability.

5. Hospital, canton, private clinic: similar needs, different priorities

The technical building blocks may be similar, but priorities differ by organisation type.

For a cantonal or university hospital, emphasis is often on:

• deep integration with the EHR and scheduling systems
• management of large consultation volumes and multiple specialties
• high availability and redundancy (24/7 services, emergency use)
• consistency with the canton’s digital‑health strategy

For a canton or public health department, priorities might include:

• a platform that can be shared across multiple institutions
• alignment with regional telemedicine or e‑health programmes
• the ability to support varied contexts (regional networks, EMS, affiliated practices)

For a private clinic or group of clinics, key criteria often are:

• strong patient‑experience and brand consistency
• flexible commercial models and rapid deployment
• ability to differentiate services (follow‑up care, second opinions, concierge‑style access)

In all three cases, hosting in Switzerland, transparent data flows and demonstrable FADP‑compliant processing remain central concerns.

6. How hospitals and cantons can move forward

A pragmatic approach for an institution considering a Swiss telemedicine platform might look like this:

1. Map clinical needs: specialties, expected volumes, typical workflows and patient profiles.
2. Involve the DPO, CISO and IT leadership early to frame legal, security and architectural requirements.
3. Decide on a hosting model: on‑premise, private Swiss cloud, or a hybrid.
4. Run a pilot with a limited scope (a few departments or use cases) using a Swiss‑hosted telemedicine platform.
5. Document end‑to‑end processes: consent, identification, documentation in the EHR, audit logging, incident handling.
6. Refine based on feedback from clinicians and patients, then scale stepwise to other services or sites.

Conclusion

For hospitals, cantons and private clinics in Switzerland, telemedicine is no longer an optional add‑on but a durable component of care delivery. The challenge is not just technological; it is legal, organisational and strategic.

Choosing a genuinely Swiss telemedicine platform, self‑hosted or locally hosted, compatible with the revised FADP, aligned with information‑security expectations and integrable into the existing health‑IT landscape allows institutions to offer modern remote‑care services while maintaining data sovereignty and patient trust.