Addressing concerns and adapting psychological techniques for videoconsultations: A practical guide

Objective: The 2020 coronavirus pandemic required many psychologists to rapidly transition to telehealth services to reduce virus exposure. Telepsychology services expanded quickly in Australia. This article seeks to provide simple and practical recommendations for clinicians who are changing their practice. Method: A narrative literature review focusing on psychologists' concerns regarding telehealth-facilitated psychology or telepsychology was undertaken. Results: Research literature and guidelines from peak professional bodies such as The Australian Psychological Society and the American Psychological Association, inform two sections of the article: Common Concerns about Videoconsultations and;Practical Considerations for Effective Videoconsultations. Telepsychology, has numerous benefits, especially during emergency situations. However, concerns regarding efficacy, therapeutic alliance, and the digital divide have contributed to psychologists' unwillingness to use telepsychology. Evidence suggests that efficacy and therapeutic alliance is comparable between telepsychology and in-person services. Simple evidence-based adjustments to therapeutic practice can optimise videoconsultations and increase the effectiveness of telepsychology. Despite the rapid change to videoconsultations, evidence suggests that Australian psychologists need not be concerned about clinical efficacy or therapeutic alliance related to telepsychology. However, it is acknowledged that transitioning to telehealth models of care is disruptive. Conclusion: This paper can assist clinicians in selecting appropriate clients for telepsychology, increase effectiveness and mitigate risks. Key Points: What is already known about this topic: (1) Research supports the clinical efficacy and establishment of therapeutic alliance related to telepsychology services and highlights that concerns regarding the digital divide need to be evidence-based, not based on assumptions. (2) As outlined in this paper, it is important to consider client suitability and ethical considerations prior to delivering telepsychology services. (3) The adaptations to psychological techniques, as highlighted in this paper, can increase the effectiveness of videoconsultations. What this topic adds: (1) An examination of common concerns related to videoconsultations including: efficacy, therapeutic alliance and the digital divide. (2) A practical evidence-based checklist for pre-therapy videoconsultation considerations. (3) An evidence-based checklist of practice adaptations that can increase effectiveness in videoconsultation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Telehealth adoption in cancer clinical trials: An Australian perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer clinical trials have traditionally occurred in-person. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has forced adaptions of all aspects of cancer care (including clinical trials) so they can be delivered remotely. We aimed to quantify and qualify current use of telehealth and how it can be further improved and routinely integrated into cancer clinical trials in Australia. METHODS: We used a mixed-method study design, involving surveys of 14 multi-site Collaborative Cancer Clinical Trial Groups members across Australia (n = 98) and qualitative interviews with trial administrators and clinicians (n = 21). RESULTS: The results of our study indicated a strong willingness to use telehealth for certain transactions of clinical trials because it was perceived as a way of increasing efficiency and reach of services. Hybrid models (including telehealth and in-person methods), which considered transaction, cancer type, and patient preferences were most favorable. Additionally, telehealth allowed for greater equity to access and reduced trial burden but interestingly had little effect on increased diversity and recruitment. Factors influencing telehealth service implementation and uptake included communication among trial stakeholders, training, and learning from the experience of others in the clinical trials community. CONCLUSION: Many but not all aspects of clinical trial care are appropriate to be delivered via telehealth. A hybrid approach provides flexibility to trial delivery and may support greater equity of access to trials in the future. Our findings and actionable recommendations support the need for greater planning, training, and guidelines to enable telehealth to be better integrated into clinical trials. Opportunities exist to expand the use of remote patient monitoring to enable more objective data collection from trial participants in the future.

Cancer care and management during COVID-19: A comparison of in-person, video and telephone consultations.

In Australia, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in the exponential growth in the delivery of telehealth services. Medicare data indicates that the majority of telehealth consultations have used the telephone, despite the known benefits of using video. The aim of this study was to understand the perceived quality and effectiveness of in-person, telephone and videoconsultations for cancer care. Data was collected via online surveys with consumers (n = 1162) and health professionals (n = 59), followed by semi-structured interviews with telehealth experienced health professionals (n = 22) and consumers (n = 18). Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and significance was tested using the chi-square test. A framework analysis and thematic analysis were used for qualitative data. Results indicate telehealth is suitable for use across the cancer care pathway. However, consumers and health professionals perceived videoconsultations facilitated visual communication and improved patients' quality of care. The telephone was appropriate for short transactional consultations such as repeat prescriptions. Consumers were rarely given the choice of consultation modality. The choice of modality depended on a range of factors such as the type of consultation and stage of cancer care. Hybrid models of care utilising in-person, video and telephone should be developed and requires further guidance to promote the adoption of telehealth in cancer care.

Costs to the Medicare Benefits Schedule for general practitioner consultations: A time-series analysis.

The COVID-19 pandemic was a catalyst for the introduction of additional telehealth funding (telehealth item numbers) for general practitioner (GP) consultations through the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) in Australia. This study evaluated the impact of telehealth funding on costs to the MBS for GP consultations from January 2017 to December 2021. An interrupted time series analysis assessed MBS costs (initial and monthly growth) for GP consultations (in-person, videoconference, telephone) before and after additional telehealth item numbers were introduced. From January 2017 to February 2020, total MBS costs for GP consultations were, on average, $545 million per month compared to $592 million per month from March 2020 to December 2021. There was an initial cost increase of approximately $39 million in the first month after additional telehealth funding was introduced (p = 0.0001). Afterwards, there was no significant change in monthly costs (p = 0.539). The introduction of additional MBS telehealth funding increased overall MBS costs for GP consultations. This increased cost for GP telehealth services could save costs to society if it translates into improved continuity of care, decreased hospitalisations, reduced productivity losses and improved patient outcomes. Future policy reform should incorporate a cost-benefit analysis to determine if increased MBS costs for GP consultations are a good investment.

Protocol for an integrative review: patient and families' perspectives on telehealth in palliative care.

INTRODUCTION: Increases in the use of telehealth in palliative care (telepalliative care) prior to, and during, the COVID-19 pandemic have resulted in a proliferation of studies on the topic. While knowledge is building on how providers and recipients adapt to telepalliative care, no reviews have, as of yet, examined telepalliative care from a patient and family perspective. Therefore, the aim of this integrative review is to explore patients and families' perspectives on telepalliative. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: An integrative review will be performed inspired by the methodology of Remmington and Toronto from March 2022 to December 2022. Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL will be searched for primary peer-reviewed studies that describe telepalliative care from patient and families' perspectives. Limiters will be used for age; 18 years+, time; 10 years, and language; English and Danish. Hand searches of authors of included articles and reference lists of included articles will be performed. Two reviewers will independently screen and appraise selected articles using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool. Conflicts will be resolved through discussions with a third reviewer. Data will be extracted independently by two reviewers into a data matrix with predefined headings and analysed using thematic analysis. Findings will be reported thematically, summarised into a thematic synthesis and discussed in relation to relevant literature. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this review. Results will be published in an international peer-reviewed journal and presented at a relevant international conference. Reporting of this protocol was guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocol checklist and prospectively reported to PROSPERO (CRD42022301206).

The impact of telehealth policy changes on general practitioner consultation activity in Australia: a time-series analysis.

Objective To examine the impact of telehealth policy changes on general practitioner (GP) consultation activity in Australia, during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, from January 2019 to December 2021. Methods An interrupted time-series analysis was conducted to analyse the impact of two major policy changes, introduced through the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS), on GP consultation (in-person, videoconference, telephone) activity. The first policy change was the introduction of additional COVID-19 telehealth funding through the MBS on 30 March 2020. The second policy change was the limitation on telephone consultation length to under 20 min on 1 July 2021. The rate of GP telehealth provision and activity was compared between pre-and post-intervention periods, separated by these MBS policy changes. Results After the first policy change, there was a significant increase in telehealth provision, with a simultaneous decrease in in-person consultations (P < 0.0001). However, telehealth provision decreased in the months following this first policy change (P < 0.0001), while in-person activity increased. After the second policy change, the initial videoconference provision increased (P < 0.0001). However, all telehealth activity decreased afterwards. In the months following the second policy change, the decrease in monthly activity for in-person (P = 0.700), telephone (0.199) and videoconference (P = 0.178) consultations was not significant. Conclusions The introduction of additional telehealth funding and limitations on telephone consultation length encouraged the initial provision and growth of telehealth services. However, these policy changes did not sustain the long-term upward trajectory of telehealth activity. Telehealth policies should increase opportunities for appropriate and sustainable GP telehealth services.

Increase in telemental health services on the Medicare Benefits Schedule after the start of the coronavirus pandemic: data from 2019 to 2021.

Objective To describe the change in telemental health service volume that resulted from the introduction of the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) item numbers in 2020 for services provided by psychologists and psychiatrists in Australia for a 3-year period, from January 2019 to December 2021. Methods Quarterly MBS activity and cost data for mental health services provided by consultant psychiatrists, clinical psychologists, and psychologists between January 2019 and December 2021 were extracted from the MBS statistics website. Data were grouped by profession and delivery mode (in-person, telephone or videoconference) and reported using activity counts. Descriptive analysis and interrupted time-series regression analysis were conducted. Specific descriptive explorations were also conducted for psychiatrists, including: new client consultations, review or general consultations, and group consultations. Results The delivery of mental health services by telehealth (telemental health) during the pandemic has increased (P < 0.0001). When the pandemic started in March 2020, telemental health services provided by psychiatrists and psychologists increased from a combined 1-2% per quarter to 29% videoconference and 20% telephone in quarter two 2020. After the onset of the pandemic, videoconference remained the primary form of telehealth for these professions. However, the telephone accounted for approximately a third of the telehealth activity after the new item numbers were introduced. Conclusion Telemental health services are more likely to be conducted by videoconference than by telephone. The observed increase in telehealth service activity confirms how crucial appropriate funding models are to the sustainability of telehealth services in Australia. The growth in telehealth was used to support people with mental health conditions in Australia.

A multi-stakeholder approach is needed to reduce the digital divide and encourage equitable access to telehealth

Since the COVID-19 pandemic onset, there has been exponential growth in the uptake of telehealth, globally. However, evidence suggests that people living in lower socioeconomic areas, cultural and linguistically diverse communities, people with disabilities, and with low health literacy are less likely to receive telehealth services. These population groups have disproportionately higher health needs and face additional barriers to healthcare access. Barriers that reduce access to telehealth further exacerbate existing gaps in care delivery. To improve equity of access to telehealth, we need to reduce the digital divide through a multi-stakeholder approach. This article proposes practical steps to reduce the digital divide and encourage equitable access to telehealth. Enabling more equitable access to telehealth requires improvements in digital health literacy, workforce training in clinical telehealth, co-design of new telehealth-enabled models of care, change management, advocacy for culturally appropriate services, and sustainable funding models.

GP perceptions of telehealth services in Australia: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Primary care providers have been rapidly transitioning from in-person to telehealth care during the 2019 coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. There is an opportunity for new research in a rapidly evolving area, where evidence for telehealth services in primary care in the Australian setting remains limited. AIM: To explore general practitioner (GP) perceptions on providing telehealth (telephone and video consultation) services in primary care in Australia. DESIGN & SETTING: A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews to gain an understanding of GP perceptions on telehealth use in Australia. METHOD: GPs across Australia were purposively sampled. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, recorded, and transcribed verbatim for analysis. Transcripts were analysed using inductive thematic analysis to identify initial codes, which were then organised into themes. RESULTS: Fourteen GPs were interviewed. Two major themes that described GP perceptions of telehealth were: (1) existence of business and financial pressures in general practice; and (2) providing quality of care in Australia. These two themes interacted with four minor themes: (3) consumer-led care; (4) COVID-19 as a driver for telehealth reimbursement and adoption; (5) refining logistical processes; and (6) GP experiences shape telehealth use. CONCLUSION: This study found that multiple considerations influenced GP choice of in-person, videoconference, or telephone consultation mode. For telehealth to be used routinely within primary care settings, evidence that supports the delivery of higher quality care to patients through telehealth and sustainable funding models will be required.

Specialist consultation activity and costs in Australia: Before and after the introduction of COVID-19 telehealth funding.

This study describes and analyses the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) activity and cost data for specialist consultations in Australia, as a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. To achieve this, activity and cost data for MBS specialist consultations conducted from March 2019 to February 2021 were analysed month-to-month. MBS data for in-person, videoconference and telephone consultations were compared before and after the introduction of COVID-19 MBS telehealth funding in March 2020. The total number of MBS specialist consultations claimed per month did not differ significantly before and after the onset of COVID-19 (p = 0.717), demonstrating telehealth substitution of in-person care. After the introduction of COVID-19 telehealth funding, the average number of monthly telehealth consultations increased (p < 0.0001), representing an average of 19% of monthly consultations. A higher proportion of consultations were provided by telephone when compared to services delivered by video. Patient-end services did not increase after the onset of COVID-19, signifying a divergence from the historical service delivery model. Overall, MBS costs for specialist consultations did not vary significantly after introducing COVID-19 telehealth funding (p = 0.589). Telehealth consultations dramatically increased during COVID-19 and patients continued to receive specialist care. After the onset of COVID-19, the cost per telehealth specialist consultation was reduced, resulting in increased cost efficiency to the MBS.

Economic evaluations of videoconference and telephone consultations in primary care: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Telehealth services using videoconference and telephone modalities have been increasing exponentially in primary care since the coronavirus pandemic. The challenge now is ensuring that these services remain sustainable. This review investigates the cost-effectiveness of videoconference and telephone consultations in primary care settings, by summarizing the available published evidence. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL databases was used to identify articles published from January 2000 to July 2020, using keyword synonyms for telehealth, primary care, and economic evaluation. Databases were searched, and title, abstract, and full-text reviews were conducted. Article reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist. RESULTS: Twenty articles were selected for inclusion, with 12 describing telephone triage services, seven describing telehealth substitution services, and one describing another telehealth service in primary care. These services were delivered by nurses, doctors, and allied health clinicians. Of the 20 included studies, 11 used cost analyses, five used cost-minimization analyses, and four used one or more methods, including either a cost-consequence analysis, a cost-utility analysis, or a cost-effectiveness analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Telephone and videoconference consultations in primary care were cost-effective to the health system when deemed clinically appropriate, clinician when time was used efficiently, and when overall demand on health services was reduced. The societal benefits of telehealth consultations should be considered an important part of telehealth planning and should influence funding reform decisions for telehealth services in primary care.

Building on the momentum: Sustaining telehealth beyond COVID-19.

The 2019 coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) has resulted in tremendous growth in telehealth services in Australia and around the world. The rapid uptake of telehealth has mainly been due to necessity - following social distancing requirements and the need to reduce the risk of transmission. Although telehealth has been available for many decades, the COVID-19 experience has resulted in heightened awareness of telehealth amongst health service providers, patients and society overall. With increased telehealth uptake in many jurisdictions during the pandemic, it is timely and important to consider what role telehealth will have post-pandemic. In this article, we highlight five key requirements for the long-term sustainability of telehealth. These include: (a) developing a skilled workforce; (b) empowering consumers; (c) reforming funding; (d) improving the digital ecosystems; and (e) integrating telehealth into routine care.

Telehealth uptake in general practice as a result of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.

In March 2020, the Australian Government added new temporary telehealth services to the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) to reduce the risk of patient-patient and patient-clinician transmission of the 2019 coronavirus (COVID-19). Here, the MBS statistics for general practitioner activity and the associated costs are described; a small increase in both activity and costs for the new MBS telehealth items were observed. The opportunities for future research and policy implications are also discussed.

Telehealth for global emergencies: Implications for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

The current coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic is again reminding us of the importance of using telehealth to deliver care, especially as means of reducing the risk of cross-contamination caused by close contact. For telehealth to be effective as part of an emergency response it first needs to become a routinely used part of our health system. Hence, it is time to step back and ask why telehealth is not mainstreamed. In this article, we highlight key requirements for this to occur. Strategies to ensure that telehealth is used regularly in acute, post-acute and emergency situations, alongside conventional service delivery methods, include flexible funding arrangements, training and accrediting our health workforce. Telehealth uptake also requires a significant change in management effort and the redesign of existing models of care. Implementing telehealth proactively rather than reactively is more likely to generate greater benefits in the long-term, and help with the everyday (and emergency) challenges in healthcare.