ORIGINAL ARTICLE
INVESTIGATING THE SATISFACTION
OF CLINICIANS AND CLIENTS
IN A TELEAUDIOLOGY TRIAL
| 1 | University of Queensland, School of Health & Rehabilitation Sciences, Brisbane, Australia |
| 2 | HearCheck, Maroochydore, Australia |
A - Research concept and design; B - Collection and/or assembly of data; C - Data analysis and interpretation; D - Writing the article; E - Critical revision of the article; F - Final approval of article;
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Carlie Driscoll
Assoc/Prof Carlie Driscoll, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia. Tel: +61 7 3365 3095, E-mail: carlie.driscoll@uq.edu.au
Assoc/Prof Carlie Driscoll, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia. Tel: +61 7 3365 3095, E-mail: carlie.driscoll@uq.edu.au
Publication date: 2018-12-31
J Hear Sci 2018;8(4):34–47
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Background:
Thus far, the uptake of telehealth in Australia has been puzzlingly small in scale and sporadic in nature. This is particularly true of audiology. The current study aimed to investigate the satisfaction of clinicians and clients with audiology appointments in a trial of the telehealth mode.
Material and Methods:
A mixed-methods study design was utilised involving surveys with all appointment participants and semi-structured post-appointment interviews with clients. Appointments were conducted with 11 individual clients; of these, 7 interviews were conducted. One audiologist and one allied health assistant were used for all appointments.
Results:
High satisfaction ratings overall were given by both clients (87.3% excellent) and the allied health assistant (74.4% excellent), whereas the audiologist consistently provided slightly lower levels of satisfaction (72.7% good). It was also found that the audiologist believed that teleaudiology increased the quality of care offered.
Conclusions:
By examining the perspectives of all key stakeholders, this study identifies a number of novel positive and negative aspects of a teleaudiology practice and offers suggestions for future implementation of such a program.
Thus far, the uptake of telehealth in Australia has been puzzlingly small in scale and sporadic in nature. This is particularly true of audiology. The current study aimed to investigate the satisfaction of clinicians and clients with audiology appointments in a trial of the telehealth mode.
Material and Methods:
A mixed-methods study design was utilised involving surveys with all appointment participants and semi-structured post-appointment interviews with clients. Appointments were conducted with 11 individual clients; of these, 7 interviews were conducted. One audiologist and one allied health assistant were used for all appointments.
Results:
High satisfaction ratings overall were given by both clients (87.3% excellent) and the allied health assistant (74.4% excellent), whereas the audiologist consistently provided slightly lower levels of satisfaction (72.7% good). It was also found that the audiologist believed that teleaudiology increased the quality of care offered.
Conclusions:
By examining the perspectives of all key stakeholders, this study identifies a number of novel positive and negative aspects of a teleaudiology practice and offers suggestions for future implementation of such a program.
REFERENCES (36)
1.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Australia’s health 2016 – in brief [online] 2016 [cited 2017 April 28]. Available from: http://www.aihw.gov.au/publica....
2.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Rural health [online] 2015 [cited 2017 July 18]. Available from: http://www.aihw.gov.au/rural-h....
3.
Lawrence G. Teleaudiology brings better hearing healthcare to Australia’s outback. Hear J, 2012; 65(11).
4.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. 4159.0 General social survey: Summary results, Australia, 2014 [online] 2015 [cited 2017 April 20]. Available from: http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS....
5.
Australian Government Department of Health. Telehealth [online] 2015 [cited 2017 March 3]. Available from: http://www.health.gov.au/inter....
6.
Cason J. Telehealth: A rapidly developing service delivery model for occupational therapy. Int J Telerehabil, 2014; 6: 29–36.
7.
Edwards M, Stredler-Brown A, Houston KT. Expanding use of telepractice in speech-language pathology and audiology. Volta Rev, 2012; 112: 227–42.
8.
Fabry D. Applications of telehealth for hearing care [online] 2010 [cited 2017 August 27]. Available from: www.audiology.org.
9.
Harrison R, Macfarlane A, Murray E, Wallace P. Patients’ perceptions of joint teleconsultations: a qualitative evaluation. Health Expect, 2006; 9: 81–90.
10.
Kairy D, Tousignant M, Leclerc N, Côté A-M, Levasseur M, et al. The patient’s perspective of in-home telerehabilitation physiotherapy services following total knee arthroplasty. Int J Environ Res Publ Health, 2013; 10: 3998–4011.
11.
Morales-Vidal S, Ruland S. Telemedicine in stroke care and rehabilitation. Top Stroke Rehabil, 2013; 20: 101–7.
12.
Raven M, Butler C, Bywood P. Video-based telehealth in Australian primary health care: current use and future potential. Aust J Prim Health, 2013; 19: 283–6.
13.
Tousignant M, Moffet H, Boissy P, Corriveau H, Cabana F, Marquis F. A randomized controlled trial of home telerehabilitation for post-knee arthroplasty, J Telemed Telecare, 2011; 17: 195–8.
14.
Worboys T, Brassington M, Ward EC, Cornwell PL. Delivering occupational therapy hand assessment and treatment sessions via telehealth. J Telemed Telecare, 2017; 185–92.
15.
Blamey PJ, Blamey JK, Saunders E. Effectiveness of a teleaudiology approach to hearing aid fitting. J Telemed Telecare, 2015; 21: 474–8.
16.
Eikelboom RH, Jayakody DMP, Swanepoel DW, Chang S, Atlas MD. Validation of remote mapping of cochlear implants. J Telemed Telecare, 2014; 20: 171–7.
17.
Elliott G, Smith AC, Bensink ME, Brown C, Stewart C, Perry C, et al. The feasibility of a community-based mobile telehealth screening service for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in Australia. Telemed J E Health, 2010; 16: 950–6.
18.
Jacobs PG, Saunders GH. New opportunities and challenges for teleaudiology within Department of Veterans Affairs. J Rehabil Res Dev, 2014; 51: 7–12.
19.
Swanepoel DW, Hall JW. A systematic review of telehealth applications in audiology. Telemed J E Health, 2010; 16: 181–200.
20.
Regina Molini-Avejonas D, Rondon-Melo S, De La Higuera Amato CA, Samelli AG. A systematic review of the use of telehealth in speech, language and hearing sciences. J Telemed Telecare, 2015; 21: 367–76.
21.
Campos PD, Ferrari DV. Teleaudiology: evaluation of teleconsultation efficacy for hearing aid fitting. J da Sociedade Brasileira de Fonoaudiologia, 2012; 24: 301–8.
22.
Krumm M. A review of contemporary tele-audiology literature. J Hear Sci, 2016; 6: 9–21.
23.
Sharma S, Ward EC, Burns C, Theodoros D, Russell T. Assessing dysphagia via telerehabilitation: patient perceptions and satisfaction. Int J Speech Lang Pathol, 2013; 15: 176–83.
24.
Dillon H, Birtles G, Lovegrove, R. Measuring the outcomes of a national rehabilitation program: normative data for the client oriented scale of improvement (COSI) and the hearing aid user’s questionnaire (HAUQ). J Am Acad Audiol, 1999; 10: 67–79.
25.
Ramkumar V, Selvakumar K, Vanaja CS, Hall JW, Nagarajan R, Neethi J. Parents’ perceptions of tele-audiological testing in a rural hearing screening program in South India. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol, 2016; 89: 60–6.
26.
Lipkin M, Schwartz M. I can’t get no patient or practitioner satisfaction. J Gen Intern Med, 2000; 15: 140–1.
27.
Suchman LA, Roter LD, Green LM, Lipkin LM. Physician satisfaction with primary care office visits. Med Care, 1993; 31: 1083–92.
28.
Haas JS, Cook EF, Puopolo AL, Burstin HR, Cleary PD, Brennan TA. Is the professional satisfaction of general internists associated with patient satisfaction? J Gen Intern Med, 2000; 15: 122–8.
29.
Singh G, Pichora-Fuller MK, Malkowski M, Boretzki M, Launer S. A survey of the attitudes of practitioners toward teleaudiology. Int J Audiol, 2014; 53: 850–60.
30.
Eikelboom R, Swanepoel D. International survey of audiologists’ attitudes toward telehealth. Am J Audiol, 2016; 25: 295–8.
31.
Tashakkori A, Teddlie C. Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA. SAGE; 2003.
32.
Severn MS, Searchfield GD, Huggard P. Occupational stress amongst audiologists: compassion satisfaction, compassion fatigue, and burnout. Int J Audiol, 2012; 51: 3–9.
33.
Hofstetter PJ, Kokesh J, Ferguson AS, Hood LJ. The impact of telehealth on wait time for ENT specialty care. Telemed J E Health, 2010; 16: 551.
34.
Reginato TTP, Ferrari DV. Teleaudiology: professional–patient communication in hearing aid programming and fitting via teleconsultation. Audiol Commun Res, 2014; 19: 299–309.
35.
Whitten P, Love B. Patient and provider satisfaction with the use of telemedicine: overview and rationale for cautious enthusiasm. J Postgrad Med, 2005; 51: 294–300.
36.
Eikelboom RH, Atlas MD. Attitude to telemedicine, and willingness to use it, in audiology patients. J Telemed Telecare, 2005; 11: 22–5.
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.