Telehealth for global emergencies: Implications for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

By Anthony C. Smith, E. Thomas, C. Snoswell, H. Haydon, Ateev Mehrotra, J. Clemensen, L. Caffery. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 2020

1,519 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The current coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic is again reminding us of the importance of using telehealth to deliver care, especially as means of reducing the risk of cross-contamination caused by close contact. For telehealth to be effective as part of an emergency response it first needs to become a routinely used part of our health system. Hence, it is time to step back and ask why telehealth is not mainstreamed. In this article, we highlight key requirements for this to occur. Strategies to ensure that telehealth is used regularly in acute, post-acute and emergency situations, alongside conventional service delivery methods, include flexible funding arrangements, training and accrediting our health workforce. Telehealth uptake also requires a significant change in management effort and the redesign of existing models of care. Implementing telehealth proactively rather than reactively is more likely to generate greater benefits in the long-term, and help with the everyday (and emergency) challenges in healthcare.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f91d728d2c3d42e322592d49c1fe9851d8e314d9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Health Professions

  1. Anthony Jnr. Bokolo
  2. Haywantee Ramkissoon

In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

  1. Anthony Jnr. Bokolo

In Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging

  1. Shwetak N. Patel
  2. Xin Liu
  3. Josh Fromm
  4. Anthony Jnr. Bokolo
  5. Daniel J. McDuff

Citations in the corpus