ObjectivesTelehealth has emerged as a viable and safe mode of care delivery in Australia during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, electronic general practice data reveal differences in uptake and consultation mode, which we hypothesise may be due to potential barriers impacting on quality of care. We aimed to identify the benefits and barriers of telehealth use in general practice, using an ‘Action Research’ approach involving general practitioners (GPs) and general practice stakeholders.DesignQualitative focus group performed within a broader Action Research methodology.SettingA focus group was held in August 2021, with general practice participants from Victoria, Australia.ParticipantsThe study consisted of a purposive sample of 11 participants, including GPs (n=4), representatives from three primary health networks (n=4) and data custodian representatives (n=3) who were part of a project stakeholder group guided by an Action Research approach.MethodsSemistructured interview questions were used to guide focus group discussions via videoconference, which were recorded and transcribed verbatim for analysis. The transcript was analysed using an inductive thematic approach.ResultsEmerging themes included evolution of telehealth, barriers to telehealth (privacy, eligibility, technology, quality of care, sociodemographic and residential aged care barriers) and benefits of telehealth (practice, quality of care, sociodemographic and residential aged care benefits).ConclusionThe findings highlight a range of barriers to telehealth that impact general practice, but also provide justification for the continuation and development of telehealth. These results provide important context to support data-driven population-based findings on telehealth uptake. They also highlight areas of quality improvement for the enhancement of telehealth as a valuable tool for routine general practice patient care.

Introduction Our earlier analysis during the COVID-19 surges in 2020 showed a reduction in general practitioner (GP) in-person visits to residential aged care facilities (RACFs) and increased use of telehealth. This study assessed how sociodemographic characteristics affected telehealth utilisation. Methods This retrospective cohort consists of 27,980 RACF residents aged 65 years and over, identified from general practice electronic health records in Victoria and New South Wales during March 2020-August 2021. Residents’ demographic characteristics, including age, sex, region, and pension status, were analysed to estimate the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the associations with telehealth utilisation (telephone/video vs. in-person consultations) and with video versus telephone consultations, in mixed-effects multiple level regression models. Results Of 32,330 median monthly GP consultations among 21,987 residents identified in 2020, telehealth visits accounted for 17% of GP consultations, of which 93% were telephone consults. In 2021, of 32,229 median monthly GP consultations among 22,712 residents, telehealth visits accounted for 11% of GP consultations (97% by telephone). Pension holders (OR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.10, 1.17) and those residing in rural areas (OR: 1.72; 95% CI: 1.57, 1.90) were more likely to use telehealth. However, residents in rural areas were less likely to use video than telephone in GP consultations (OR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.29, 0.57). Results were similar in separate analyses for each COVID surge. Discussion Telephone was primarily used in telehealth consultations among pension holders and rural residents in RACFs. Along with the limited use of video in virtual care in rural RACFs, the digital divide may imply potential healthcare disparities in socially disadvantaged patients.

No abstract

Background For people with acquired neurological disabilities and complex needs, general practitioners (GPs) play an important role in health management and early intervention for the prevention of comorbidities and health complications. People with disability are a vulnerable group who need and have the right to, quality general practice services. It is therefore important to understand the health needs and service use of this group. The aim of this review was to identify the healthcare needs and general practice utilization of people with acquired neurological disabilities and complex needs. Methods A scoping review methodological framework was utilized. Six databases (MEDLINE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase and the Cochrane Library) were searched. Articles were included if they reported on general practice service utilization of people with acquired neurological disabilities and complex needs aged between 18 and 65. Articles were required to be peer‐reviewed, written in English and published between 2010 and 2021. Results Thirty‐one articles were included in the review. Studies originated from Canada (9), the United States (8), Australia (4), Switzerland (4), the United Kingdom (2), England (1), Norway (1), France (1) and Denmark (1). For many people, GPs were the main healthcare provider. People with disability consult multiple healthcare providers and navigate complex healthcare systems. Commonly presented healthcare needs were bladder, bowel and skin problems, pain and chronic pain, medication needs and mental health concerns. Conclusions People with acquired neurological disabilities and complex needs were vulnerable to receiving suboptimal healthcare. The literature highlighted issues regarding the accessibility of services, the fragmentation of health services and inadequate preventative care. GPs were challenged to offer adequate disability‐related expertise and to meet the mental health needs of people with disability within time constraints. Patient and Public Involvement This manuscript was prepared in collaboration with a GP, who is one of the authors. A person with lived experience of acquired neurological disability was engaged to check the alignment of the findings with their personal experience and provide feedback.