SLPSystematic ReviewThe South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings2022

In pursuit of increasing the application of tele-audiology in South Africa: COVID-19 puts on the alert for patient site facilitator training.

Katijah Khoza-Shangase

PMID 35924605

WHAT IT FOUND

Training for patient site facilitators in tele-audiology is short, ranging from 1 hour to 5 days, and non-standardized.

Only one of 13 reviewed studies described a structured programme, and no regulated training standard exists for this role.

Key findings

01Across the reviewed studies, PSF training ranged from 1 hour to a maximum of 5 days, revealing wide diversity in the character of training practices.

02Only one of the reviewed studies detailed a training programme with structured, multi-level content, including a 4-hour in-person observation at a university-based audiology clinic.

03No standard or regulated training programme exists for patient site facilitators in tele-audiology, and no minimum standards define who can be trained or what the training should include.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

Only 13 studies were included, all published between 2017 and 2021, so the evidence base is small and recent. Most of the included evidence comes from the synchronous tele-audiology model. The asynchronous model, which the author argues is more relevant for South Africa, is represented by only three studies. Training practices across the 13 studies are highly heterogeneous in duration, content, and who delivers the training, making it difficult to identify a best practice. The review is limited to English-language publications. The review is descriptive. It documents what training exists but does not evaluate whether any approach is superior or effective for patient outcomes. The author's recommendations (using audiology technicians, adopting asynchronous models, embedding PSF training in a regulated role) are expert opinion, not tested interventions.

The easy way to misread this

Do not read the 13 included studies as a robust evidence base for PSF training. The training practices are highly inconsistent (1 hour to 5 days, varied content, no standard), most come from the synchronous model, and the author's recommendations for audiology technicians and asynchronous tele-audiology are expert opinion, not tested interventions.

Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →