Telehealth experiences of vulnerable clients living in Tasmania.
Pieter Jan Van Dam, Diane Caney, Richard C Turner and 3 others
PMID 35076149WHAT IT FOUND
Vulnerable Tasmanian clients found telehealth convenient, saving travel, time and money, but wanted face-to-face for new diagnoses or physical exams.
Phone-based care needed clear privacy, unhurried conversations and good bandwidth.
Key findings
01Clients described telehealth as saving time, money and energy because it removed travel and let them stay in their own homes.
02Most preferred telehealth for routine care, but new diagnoses or physical examinations were felt to be better face-to-face.
03Some felt consultations were rushed, and clients wanted clinicians to say where they were and who was joining.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
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.
What it does not show
Only 12 participants from one Tasmanian jurisdiction were studied, so the themes may not apply to other vulnerable clients or to people without multiple chronic conditions. The study was conducted during COVID-19 restrictions, when face-to-face care was limited and safety concerns may have shaped preferences. It reports experiences and preferences, not clinical outcomes, safety events or comparisons with face-to-face care. No dropout or refusal data are reported, so it is unclear how many eligible clients were missed.
The easy way to misread this
Do not treat this as evidence that telehealth improves clinical outcomes. Twelve clients described their experiences during pandemic restrictions, and many still wanted face-to-face care for new diagnoses or physical examinations.