Client, provider and community referrer perceptions of telehealth for the delivery of rural paediatric allied health services
Client, provider and community referrer perceptions of telehealth for the delivery of rural paediatric allied health services
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/ajr.12519
复制
发表时间：
2019-09-30
影响因子：
1.8
通讯作者：
Hartley, Nicole
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Campbell, Jessica;Theodoros, Deborah;Hartley, Nicole
目的调查联合医疗客户、提供者和社区转诊者对远程医疗提供农村儿科联合医疗服务的看法，以促进采用。定性设计采用了与三个关键利益相关者群体的半结构化访谈。利益相关者与BUSHkids（皇家昆士兰布什儿童健康计划）有关，这是一个为澳大利亚昆士兰的儿童和家庭服务的非营利组织。参与者39名利益相关者（12名客户，16名提供者和11名社区推荐人）。参与者被问及对远程医疗的熟悉程度、使用远程医疗的意愿以及对远程医疗可接受性的感知障碍和促进因素。结果59%的参与者经历过远程医疗，77%的参与者愿意使用远程医疗。与会者认为，技术问题是远程保健的障碍，儿童无法集中精力或享受远程保健会议，关系和沟通不如面对面会议，远程保健不适合采用身体接触的学科。与会者指出，获得保健服务是远程保健的一个关键好处，他们说技术问题是可以解决的，并说远程保健服务可以得到内部合作伙伴（例如助理）和外部合作伙伴（例如当地医疗中心）的支持。他们还确定了远程医疗对家庭的各种好处（例如，便利、隐私）。结论总体而言，利益相关者可接受远程医疗。提供者需要培训，以促进儿童在线参与，并确定身体接触的替代方案。应该利用共同学习的机会来解决低提供者和转诊者的自我效能。
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.