TECH

Is your dental software held together with duct tape?

Some of the most important data connections in your practice management stack may not really be connections at all but bots pretending to be humans, clicking through screens and copying fields like a temp worker who never takes a break. And just like a temp worker, those bots are prone to mistakes.

Catch up: A meaningful share of dental software integrations still rely on a technique called robotic process automation (RPA) to move data between systems, where software "robots" log in to applications using stored credentials, navigate user interfaces, read screen elements, and copy-paste data from one system to another.

• RPA functionality is common in older software built when "integration" often meant CSV exports and hiring someone to manually copy-and-paste data.

The modern alternative to RPAs are application programming interfaces, or APIs. APIs are purpose-built channels that let systems talk directly to each other in a structured, secure, and machine-to-machine handshake. That means data is always communicated in a standard, predictable way (and there’s no risk of an “integration” being broken by a stray pop-up or an app re-design). 

• APIs are table stakes in sectors with mature software ecosystems but still relatively new to some industries where legacy software is widely used. 

What’s happening: The dental industry is in the middle of a slow but steady migration from RPAs to APIs with major vendors formalizing API programs. 

Why it matters: The migration from RPAs to APIs has happened across much of the software world for the same reasons it’s now happening in dental—because building your business on a foundation of RPAs is setting yourself up for trouble down the road.

• Reliability: RPAs are prone to breaking when a vendor updates its interface. A moved button, a changed label, an unexpected pop-up—any of these can derail an automation that was working fine yesterday. APIs transmit data in a standard way using code that can be tested before customers ever interact with it.
  

• Security: APIs are built to comply with HIPAA requirements, like access controls and audit trails. RPA bots, on the other hand, typically log in with stored credentials—sometimes shared accounts—and operate through the same login as your staff, creating audit headaches and security vulnerabilities.
  

• Cost: RPA is cheap to start but expensive to maintain. PwC found that human oversight of bot controls works fine at three robots, becomes "overwhelming" at 30, and "untenable at 300." The extra precautions needed to overcome reliability and security issues can slow down your workflows, require more human oversight, and can never fully eliminate the risk of downtime (or worse, security breaches).

Bottom line: If your tech stack includes integrations that work by "logging in like a user," you're not alone, but you should be planning the exit. Modern organizations are treating RPAs as temporary infrastructure and migrating to APIs ASAP before a system-breaking interface update or a security incident makes the decision for them.