Understanding the implementation of telepractice in speech and language services using a mixed-methods approach

Background: Telepractice emerged as a solution to overcome the challenges of access issues in the delivery of healthcare. Telepractice in speech language pathology (SLP) has existed for nearly a decade yet there is a significant knowledge gap with respect to the factors influencing the implementation of telepractice as a routine or long-term, sustained effort. This mixed-methods study aimed to identify implementation factors that influence the provision of telepractice in SLP services.

Method: A mixed-methods study consisting of a scoping review and semi-structured interviews (SSI) was carried out. Articles that described telepractice in SLP were included based on an operational definition of implementation and a set of inclusion criteria.

Results: Data was extracted from 11 studies that were mapped to nine projects in telepractice in SLP. The broad focus areas identified included diagnostics and evaluation, therapeutics and comprehensive assessment, management and follow-up care services. Synchronous/ real-time telepractice methods were always used for the provision of diagnostic testing or when providing therapy services using video conferencing. The ‘ professional-facilitator-patient’ model was used most commonly followed by the ‘ professional-patient’ model.  Barriers for long-term sustainability included inadequate initial capital investment, lack of reimbursement and payment options, low internet speed and bandwidth, resistance and hesitancy to use telepractice from the patient’s end, lack of organizational policies and uniform regulations. Sustainable source of funding, having a dedicated team of professionals and technicians with clear roles and responsibilities, and inclusion of systematic planning facilitated implementation. 

Conclusion: In general, telepractice in SLP was not explicitly guided by implementation science or framework. The use of implementation frameworks ensures systematic planning and feasibility assessment to inform the scale-up of implementation. Therefore, it would be worthwhile for program implementers to consider these aspects when exploring telepractice services.

Understanding the implementation of telepractice in speech and language services for children and adults using a mixed-methods approach

Background: Telepractice emerged as a solution to overcome the challenges of access issues in the delivery of healthcare. Telepractice in speech language pathology (SLP) has existed for nearly a decade yet there is a significant knowledge gap with respect to the factors influencing the implementation of telepractice as a routine or long-term, sustained effort. This mixed-methods study aimed to identify implementation factors that influence the provision of telepractice in SLP services. Method: A mixed-methods study consisting of a scoping review and semi-structured interviews (SSI) was carried out. Articles that described telepractice in SLP were included based on an operational definition of implementation and a set of inclusion criteria. Results: Data was extracted from 11 studies that were mapped to nine projects in telepractice in SLP. The broad focus areas identified included diagnostics and evaluation, therapeutics and comprehensive assessment, management and follow-up care services. Synchronous/ real-time telepractice methods were always used for the provision of diagnostic testing or when providing therapy services using video conferencing. The ‘professional-facilitator-patient’ model was used most commonly followed by the ‘professional-patient’ model.  Barriers for long-term sustainability included inadequate initial capital investment, lack of reimbursement and payment options, low internet speed and bandwidth, resistance and hesitancy to use telepractice from the patient’s end, lack of organizational policies and uniform regulations. Sustainable source of funding, having a dedicated team of professionals and technicians with clear roles and responsibilities, and inclusion of systematic planning facilitated implementation.  Conclusion: In general, telepractice in SLP was not explicitly guided by implementation science or framework. The use of implementation frameworks ensures systematic planning and feasibility assessment to inform the scale-up of implementation. Therefore, it would be worthwhile for program implementers to consider these aspects when exploring telepractice services.