The telemedical imperative

Abstract

Technology presents a means of improving health outcomes for vast numbers of individuals. Whether big data, artificial intelligence, or the internet of things, technology holds great promise in the health space. 1 One such application is so-called 'telemedicine'. Telemedicine can be traced back over a century, with telephone consultations discussed in The Lancet as early as 1879. 2 It has historically been deployed to streamline healthcare delivery and reach those who would previously have faced obstacles to accessing services. Indeed, in low-and middle-income countries, telemedicine addresses health inequities by engaging those living in less affluent, rural communities. 3 The broader classification of

Ethical Duties of Nephrologists: When Patients Are Nonadherent to Treatment

“…Using technology in this way may not only be ethically defensible, but ethically required. The telemedical imperative holds that given the benefits of such technologies, healthcare systems have a duty to seriously consider their implementation provided they are safe, effective, acceptable to patients, and raise no other service-specific concerns [37].…”

Provider-to-provider synchronous telemedical consultations in ophthalmology: Advice for implementation

“…The use of telemedicine has expanded significantly over the past few decades and will most likely continue to expand in the years to come. Adoption of telemedicine is sometimes viewed as a moral imperative; 13 however, it can be complex and requires time and resources to appropriately implement. For the successful implementation of our telemedicine model for synchronous ophthalmology consultations, one must overcome an initial learning curve.…”

Early medical abortion, equality of access, and the telemedical imperative

“…Given this strong evidence base, the authors of Early medical abortion, equality of access, and the telemedical imperative argue that “any society that claims to hold evidence-based healthcare in high regard has a moral obligation to introduce, retain, or reinstate (as applicable) TEMA to protect and promote the health of pregnant people” (p.xxix). Building upon Parsons’ 1 proposed “telemedical imperative” and drawing on the case studies of the United Kingdom and the United States, Parsons and Romanis are concerned with abortion access and advocating for TEMA as one choice among many in patient-centred reproductive health. Although COVID-19 prompted the legalisation of full TEMA in England, Scotland, and Wales and at the federal level in the US, the authors lament that “it took a global pandemic and the resulting near impossibility of providing adequate abortion services to finally push those in power to make changes that enabled TEMA provision” (p.xxiii).…”

“…The telemedical imperative, further developed here from Parsons, 1 is the duty for health care systems to implement telemedicine where it is safe, effective, and acceptable and there are no service-specific concerns. The authors successfully make the case for early medical abortion (EMA) satisfying these conditions in both countries.…”