Search

Objective: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic precipitated a major shift in the use of telehealth in Australia. The changes highlighted gaps in our knowledge regarding the efficacy of, and clinician attitudes to, the use of telehealth. The current study expands and deepens the available evidence as a result of being collected in unique circumstances that removed one of the major barriers (lack of Medicare rebates) and also one major enablers (willingness) of telehealth uptake. Methods: Using a semi-structured interview, we invited clinicians (N = 39) to share their perspectives, attitudes and experiences of using telehealth. Topics covered included perceptions of the strengths and challenges of telehealth, and how experience of using telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic had influenced clinicians' views and intentions regarding their future practice. Participants included clinicians from five disciplines across public and private practice: paediatrics, neurology, immunology, rural general practice, and orthopaedics. Results: We found three key dimensions for consideration when assessing the suitability of telehealth for ongoing practice: the attributes of the patient population, the attributes of the clinical context and environment, and the risks and benefits of a telehealth approach. These findings map to the existing literature and allow us to infer that the experiences of clinicians who previously would have chosen telehealth did not differ significantly from those of our 'pandemic-conscripted' clinicians. Conclusions: Our findings map clearly to the existing literature and allow us to infer that the experiences of the clinicians who have chosen telehealth (and are already represented in the literature) did not differ significantly from those trying out telehealth under the unique circumstances of the removal of the Medicare Benefits Scheme barrier and external pressure that over-rides the 'willingness' enabling factor in uptake decisions. What is known about the topic? Clinician and patient experiences of telehealth use have already been documented in contexts where both clinician and patient have opted-in to that process. What does this paper add? The paper adds data on clinician experience across a range of specialities, from a context (pandemic public-heath measures) where the choice element was reduced for both patient and clinician. What are the implications for practitioners? The data speak to the generalisability of existing evidence, but also provide practical considerations in planning for the inclusion of telehealth for specialist health services in the Australian context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]