ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has widened the funded use of telehealth in Australia to support telehealth delivery to all patients in any setting. Increasing the use and experience of telehealth brings to light unique insights into the advantages and challenges of this new model of healthcare delivery This study aimed to qualitatively explore the experiences of both palliative care physicians and patients setting, including their views on its future role in healthcare. METHODS: This qualitative study was conducted across three metropolitan tertiary palliative care centers in Victoria, Australia between November 2020 and March 2021. Purposive sampling identified 23 participants (12 physicians and 11 patients). Semi-structured interviews focused on the last telehealth consultation, thoughts and impressions of telehealth, and the possibility of telehealth remaining in palliative care. A thematic approach was adopted to code and analyze the data. RESULTS: Telehealth transformed the ways physicians and patients in this study perceived and engaged with outpatient palliative care across the entire continuum of care. Four key themes were identified: (1) access to care; (2) delivery of care; (3) engagement with care; and (4) the future. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: This study provides novel data bringing together the perspective of patients and physicians, which confirms the utility of telehealth in palliative care. Its convenience enables more frequent review, enables reviews to occur in response to lower levels of concern, and adds toward enhancing the continuity of care across and between settings. Moving forward, support seemed strongest for a hybrid model of telehealth and face-to-face consultations guided by key parameters relating to the level of anticipated complexity.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In Australia during the COVID-19 pandemic new funding models were introduced to support telehealth consultations, resulting in their widescale adoption in palliative care service delivery. Clarity around the clinical circumstances and patient populations that might be most appropriate for telehealth models was required. AIMS: To evaluate patient and physician satisfaction, acceptability and utility of outpatient palliative care provision through telehealth. METHODS: This is a multi-site prospective, cross-sectional, observational study conducted during a time of significant public health restrictions. A survey was used to collect matched patient- and physician-reported perceptions of palliative care telehealth consultations across three metropolitan hospitals in Victoria, Australia. RESULTS: There were 127 matched patient-physician data of telehealth consultations and a further 812 physician-only assessments. Telehealth was generally acceptable and satisfactory, with patients providing greater positive scores than clinicians. Telehealth incorporating both audio and video were more acceptable and satisfactory, particularly with the presence of a carer, and during routine reviews. Physicians were less satisfied using telehealth when there was increasing symptom complexity across all domains (pain, psychological, and other symptoms). CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth has high utility in palliative care practice. A future hybrid model of care comprising both face-to-face and telehealth consultations seems favoured by patients and physicians but must be accompanied by targeted support for specific patient groups to ensure equitable healthcare access. Further evaluation of telehealth during a time of fewer public health emergency measures and lower community anxiety is required to fully understand its ongoing role.