Client, provider and community referrer perceptions of telehealth for the delivery of rural paediatric allied health services. (30th September 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Campbell, Jessica; Theodoros, Deborah; Russell, Trevor; Gillespie, Nicole; Hartley, Nicole
• Is Part Of: Australian journal of rural health. Volume 27:Number 5(2019)
• Page Start: 419
• Page End: 426
• Publication Date: 2019-09-30
• Subjects: allied health -- children -- perceptions -- stakeholders -- telehealth; Rural health -- Periodicals; Rural health -- Australia -- Periodicals; 613
• DOI: 10.1111/ajr.12519
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1038-5282

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: To examine allied health client, provider and community referrer perceptions of telehealth for the delivery of rural paediatric allied health services to facilitate adoption. Design: A qualitative design employed semistructured interviews with the three key stakeholder groups. Setting: Stakeholders were associated with BUSHkids (The Royal Queensland Bush Children's Health Scheme), a not‐for‐profit organisation serving children and families in Queensland, Australia. Participants: Thirty‐nine stakeholders (12 clients, 16 providers and 11 community referrers). Main outcome measures: Participants were asked about familiarity with telehealth, willingness to use telehealth and perceived barriers and facilitators to telehealth acceptability. Result: Fifty‐nine percent of participants had experienced telehealth and 77 percent were willing to use it. Participants perceived that technology problems were a barrier to telehealth, that children would not be able to concentrate on or enjoy telehealth sessions, that relationships and communication would be inferior to in‐person sessions, and that telehealth was inappropriate for disciplines employing physical touch. Participants identified access to health services as a key benefit of telehealth, said that technology problems could be worked around, and said that telehealth services could be supported with internal partners (eg, assistants) and external partners (eg, local medical centres). They also identified a variety of telehealth benefits to families (eg, convenience, privacy). Conclusion: Overall, telehealth was acceptable to stakeholders. Providers need training to facilitate child participation online and identify alternatives to physical touch. Co‐learning opportunities should be used to address low provider and referrer self‐efficacy.