WebRTC (Web Real-Time Communication) has revolutionized the way we communicate and collaborate online, particularly in the realm of video conferencing. Organizations seeking to implement a WebRTC-based communication platform have two primary options: utilizing a Communication Platform as a Service (CPaaS) provider or building a custom on-premise solution. This article explores the comparison of CPaaS providers in the healthcare industry and delves into the anatomy of an on-premise WebRTC solution.
Comparison of CPaaS Providers
In the healthcare sector, several CPaaS providers offer WebRTC capabilities. The three prominent providers in this space are TokBox, Twilio, and Vidyo.io. Here’s a comparison of their key features:
TokBox: TokBox is a leading CPaaS provider for video conferencing, serving over 600 healthcare-related applications. They have a strong client base, including organizations like InTouch Health, Calgary Scientific, and Babylon Health. TokBox offers HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) compliance with additional pricing.
Twilio: Twilio is the largest CPaaS vendor with a wide range of communication services, including messaging, voice, and video. While they have healthcare clients such as caremessage and UC San Diego, their video conferencing capabilities are not extensively used in the healthcare sector.
Vidyo.io: Vidyo.io is a relatively new player in the CPaaS market but has a strong background in video conferencing, spanning over a decade. With clients like Kaiser Permanente and AllScripts, Vidyo.io is gaining traction in the healthcare industry.
Cost Comparison
Cost is a significant factor when considering CPaaS vendors. The table below compares the pricing models of Twilio, TokBox, and Vidyo.io for delivering 100k daily user minutes of conferences for 22 working days in a month:
Vendor | Pricing Model | Cost
Twilio | USD 0.0045 / min | USD 9900
TokBox | USD 0.00400 + base fee USD 9.99 | USD 8810
Vidyo.io | USD 65/month for 6500 minutes + USD 0.01 / min | USD 22000
Note: These pricing comparisons are indicative and subject to change. The calculations are based on publicly available information.
Anatomy of an On-Premise Solution
Before the rise of cloud CPaaS providers, on-premise video telehealth solutions were prevalent. Developing a reliable on-premise WebRTC-based video conferencing platform entails several server components:
Signaling Server: Handles the transfer of Session Description Protocol (SDP) messages between browsers/devices.
ICE Server/NAT Traversal: Assists with Network Address Translation (NAT) traversal to establish peer-to-peer connections.
Media Server: Enables multiparty calls, recording, media manipulation, and live broadcasting.
Gateway Server: Establishes connections between browsers and other devices.
Each server type has specific hosting requirements, and alternatives are available depending on the organization’s needs.
Other considerations for on-premise solutions include storage capacity for retaining video conferencing files, ensuring data security at the application level, bandwidth requirements, and the need for ongoing development, testing, and maintenance.
Conclusion
When considering a WebRTC-based communication platform, organizations must evaluate the pros and cons of using CPaaS providers or building an on-premise solution. CPaaS providers like TokBox, Twilio, and Vidyo.io offer different features, pricing models, and healthcare client bases. On the other hand, an on-premise solution provides more control but requires significant development, maintenance, and infrastructure resources. By carefully assessing their requirements, organizations can make an informed