Evelien R Spelten1, Ruth N Hardman2, Kerryn E Pike3, Eva Y N Yuen4, Carlene Wilson4. 1. La Trobe University, Rural Health School, Melbourne, Australia. Electronic address: e.spelten@latrobe.edu.au. 2. La Trobe University, Rural Health School, Melbourne, Australia. 3. La Trobe University, School of Psychology and Public Health, Melbourne, Australia. 4. La Trobe University, School of Psychology and Public Health, Melbourne, Australia; Olivia Newton-John Cancer Wellness and Research Centre, Austin Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate what factors need consideration for telehealth services for cancer supportive care, given the rapid transition to telehealth as a result of COVID-19. METHODS: A scoping review and a review of current guidance and guidelines provided by professional bodies, representing relevant discipline groups for cancer supportive care, were conducted. RESULTS: We identified 19 papers and 23 telehealth guidance documents. The results highlight how the characteristics of patient group and healthcare provider influence the acceptability and utility of the service and establish a minimum set of preconditions. The reviews primarily examined patient-focused difficulties or issues with acceptability and efficacy, with only a minority highlighting how provider issues might also be implicated. By contrast, the guidance and guidelines described a need to address skills gaps in providing and receiving support through telehealth. CONCLUSION: The capacity and willingness of services to adapt, in the context of COVID-19, is reassuring. It is important that the impact of the move to telehealth on service quality is assessed and systems put in place to ensure sustainability, acceptability, and adaptability. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Key recommendations can be made to assist service telehealth optimisation, many of which apply irrespective of the specific service focus.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate what factors need consideration for telehealth services for cancer supportive care, given the rapid transition to telehealth as a result of COVID-19. METHODS: A scoping review and a review of current guidance and guidelines provided by professional bodies, representing relevant discipline groups for cancer supportive care, were conducted. RESULTS: We identified 19 papers and 23 telehealth guidance documents. The results highlight how the characteristics of patient group and healthcare provider influence the acceptability and utility of the service and establish a minimum set of preconditions. The reviews primarily examined patient-focused difficulties or issues with acceptability and efficacy, with only a minority highlighting how provider issues might also be implicated. By contrast, the guidance and guidelines described a need to address skills gaps in providing and receiving support through telehealth. CONCLUSION: The capacity and willingness of services to adapt, in the context of COVID-19, is reassuring. It is important that the impact of the move to telehealth on service quality is assessed and systems put in place to ensure sustainability, acceptability, and adaptability. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Key recommendations can be made to assist service telehealth optimisation, many of which apply irrespective of the specific service focus.
Authors: Catherine E Huggins; Lauren Hanna; Kate Furness; Mary Anne Silvers; June Savva; Helena Frawley; Daniel Croagh; Paul Cashin; Liang Low; Judy Bauer; Helen Truby; Terry P Haines Journal: Nutrients Date: 2022-08-07 Impact factor: 6.706