. 2022 Feb 14;30(3):321–336. doi: 10.1111/ajr.12843

TABLE 2.

Study characteristics

Author and year	Study design and setting	Sample and demographics	Patient population	Objectives of the study	Data analysis	Results	Bias considered
McAllister, Dunkley and Wilson ³⁹ 2008	Qualitative; semi‐structured interviews Rural New South Wales, Australia	4 speech pathologists, 24‐45 y old, all female, clinical experience <3 to >15 y	Mixed adult and paediatric caseload	To explore factors influencing attitudes towards using ICT	Thematic content analysis	Barriers: No direct interpersonal contact (lack of physical touch), lack of infrastructure, lack of training and support, lack of confidence, lack of time to implement telehealth Facilitators: Time saving for client and clinician, cost saving, improves access	No
Dunkley, Pattie, Wilson and McAllister ⁴¹ 2010	Quantitative; cross‐sectional survey Rural New South Wales, Australia	43 residents, 25‐54 y old, 41 female, 2 male 49 speech pathologists, 20‐54 (mode 25‐29) y old, 47 female, 2 male, clinical experience 0.5‐20 y	Mixed adult and paediatric caseload	To explore access and attitudes of NSW residents towards ICT To explore access and attitudes of NSW SLPs towards ICT To compare attitudes of NSW residents and SLPs towards ICT	Descriptive statistics Comparison of survey results	Barriers: Should not replace face‐to‐face, need for training and support, lack of physical touch, personal finances Most SLPs reported they were not confident with videoconferencing	No
Hill and Miller ¹³ 2012	Mixed‐methods; cross‐sectional survey with some qualitative questions Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, Northern Territory and Western Australia, Australia	57 speech pathologists, <45 y old, 98% female, clinical experience 0.5‐30 y (average 10.9)	Mixed adult and paediatric caseload	To determine the types of telehealth technology used in speech and language services To determine the client populations telehealth is being used with clinically To identify attitudes of SLPs towards telehealth	Descriptive statistics Thematic analysis	Barriers: technology failures, lack of IT support, lack of telehealth infrastructure, inadequate training Facilitators: Access, time efficiency for client and clinician, reduced costs, caseload management, client‐focused Descriptions: 50% had used videoconferencing	No
Tucker ⁴⁰ 2012	Qualitative; semi‐structured interviews USA—school‐based	5 speech pathologists, clinical experience 11‐36 y, experience with telehealth 9 mo‐3 y Age and sex not reported	School‐aged children	What themes emerge from interviews about implementation of school‐based telepractice? What are the knowledge, skills, attitudes and beliefs of SLPs towards telepractice in schools.	Thematic analysis	Barriers: Technology barriers, inadequate training for SLPs and e‐helpers, time to implement program, lack of physical touch, inappropriate for students with profound disabilities Facilitators: facilitates student learning, collaboration, access to speech pathologists, benefits families	Yes (selection)
Tucker ⁴² 2012	Quantitative; cross‐sectional survey USA—school‐based	170 speech pathologists, clinical experience 1‐25+ y Age and sex not reported	School‐aged children	To determine SLP perceptions of telepractice in schools	Descriptive statistics	6% had used telepractice, 86% had training before providing telepractice service, 70% thought training required, 14% agreed that rapport could be established via telepractice, and 30% interested in providing telepractice in schools	Yes (selection)
Hines, Ramsden, Martinovich and Fairweather ³⁷ 2015	Qualitative; semi‐structured interviews Sydney, Australia—school‐based	15 speech pathologists, 24‐54 y old, 9 participants with <5 y clinical experience, experience with telehealth in the last year Sex not reported	School‐aged children	To identify factors that contribute to positive clinician attitudes about telehealth	Thematic analysis	Positive attitudes towards therapeutic relationships with children, collaboration with teachers and parents, adequacy of technology and access to support and learning	No
Edirippulige et al ⁹ 2016	Mixed‐methods; qualitative semi‐structured interviews and quantitative analysis of locations by geomapping. Queensland, Australia	329 patients with cerebral palsy, 203 male, 126 female, mean age 9 y 13 clinicians including 4 occupational therapists, 2 physiotherapists and 2 speech pathologists. 92% had experience with telehealth Age, sex and years of clinical experience not reported	Children with cerebral palsy	To understand methods of service delivery to patients with cerebral palsy To examine clinicians’ use and perceptions of telehealth	Descriptive statistics—qualitative responses and frequency reported	Geomapping: average 836km to Brisbane appointments and average 173km to outreach appointments Barriers: disrupts clinician‐client rapport, technology barriers, should not replace face‐to‐face as stand along treatment, impractical for certain assessments, privacy Facilitators: Pre/post‐op planning over distance, adjunctive treatment, maintaining relationships over distance, support and training, privacy	No
Ashburner, Vickerstaff, Beetge and Copley ³⁵ 2016	Qualitative; semi‐structured interviews Queensland, Australia	4 mothers, 2 special education teachers, 2 classroom teachers, 2 occupational therapists, 2 speech pathologists. Clinical experience 6 wk to 20 y, all had experience with telehealth Age and sex not reported	Children with autism spectrum disorder, aged 3‐7 y	To understand what parents and service providers perceive as advantages and disadvantages of an early‐intervention program delivered remotely	Thematic analysis	Barriers: Technical difficulties, should not replace face‐to‐face Facilitators: Reduces cost of time and travel for client and clinician, upskills parents and providers, flexible, access for families, stakeholder collaboration	Yes (response)
Iacono et al ³¹ 2016	Mixed‐methods; cross‐sectional quantitative survey and qualitative interviews Australia	Survey; 15 mothers, 19 practitioners including 5 speech pathologists, 4 occupational therapists Interviews; 8 practitioners (type not described) Age, sex and years of clinical experience not reported	Children with autism spectrum disorder	To explore parent and practitioner readiness for telehealth	Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis	Barriers: technology issues, poor confidence, inappropriate for children with autism, interferes with rapport Facilitators: improves travel time, children seen in familiar environment Descriptive: 57.9% of practitioners had used videoconferencing, 33.3% agreeable to using it for intervention, 73% believed time saving for family	No
Akamoglu, Meadan, Pearson and Cummings ³⁴ 2018	Qualitative; semi‐structured interviews and questionnaire USA	15 speech pathologists, all female, 30‐55 y old, experience with telepractice 1‐5 y Clinical experience not reported	Children in school and home settings	To understand what practices and activities SLPs use to build rapport with children and parents via telehealth To understand the perceived effects of rapport building on outcomes.	Thematic analysis	Barriers: reliance on ‘e‐helpers’ such as parents and staff, selecting appropriate children for telehealth, lack of physical touch Facilitators: building rapport with families in remote areas	No
Campbell, Theodoros, Russell, Gillespie and Hartley ³⁶ 2019	Qualitative; semi‐structured interviews Queensland, Australia	39 stakeholders including 3 occupational therapists and 3 speech pathologists, 4 male, 35 female, 18‐74 y old, most 30‐44 (n = 21) Clinical experience not reported. Age and sex not split into stakeholder groups.	Children receiving BUSHkids (remote health scheme)	To examine allied health client, provider and community referrer perceptions of telehealth for the delivery of rural paediatric allied health services to facilitate adoption	Thematic analysis	Barriers: technology programs, poor relationships and lack of physical touch, self‐efficacy, inferior relationships, clinical information missed, children would not be able to participate, privacy Facilitators: access, benefits families, technology barriers can be solved, telehealth supported by partnerships	Yes (generalisability)
Johnsson, Kerslake and Crook ³⁸ 2019	Qualitative; semi‐structured interviews New South Wales, Australia	21 stakeholders including 11 parents, 6 local support team members and 4 teletherapists (1 occupational therapist, 1 speech pathologist, 1 psychologist, 1 special educator) Teletherapists had 2 y of clinical experience, no telehealth experience Sex and age not reported	16 children with ASD from 2 to 12 y old	To identify feasibility, essential requirements and potential barriers in delivering therapy support to regional and remote participants on the autism spectrum via videoconferencing technology	Thematic analysis	Barriers: limits goals that require physical interaction (lack of physical touch), local staff changes, additional in‐person services would help with rapport Facilitators: training builds confidence, adequate technology, collaboration, access to specialist services, similar to in‐person sessions, fills the gap in regional services	No
Rortvedt and Jacobs ³³ 2019	Mixed‐methods; quantitative cross‐sectional survey with some qualitative questions USA	27 stakeholders including 11 occupational therapists (others education staff) Experience 5‐30+ y, most 15‐30 (n = 11)	School‐aged children	To gather information on perspectives, perceived barriers and benefits of using telehealth for school‐based occupational therapy	Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis	Barriers: logistics, lack of physical touch, privacy concerns, Facilitators: logistics (less travel), collaboration, better access to OTs, better access for homebound students Descriptive: 28% likely to adopt telehealth, 14% unlikely, remaining preferred not to answer. 42% were interested in telehealth education, 42% were not and the remaining did not know	No
Raatz, Ward and Marshall ³² 2020	Mixed‐methods; quantitative cross‐sectional survey with some qualitative questions Australia, all states and territories excluding Northern Territory	84 speech pathologists, <30 to >50 y old, most 30‐50 (n = 47), 26 clinician level, 54 senior clinician level, 4 management level Sex not reported	Children requiring feeding services	To establish speech and language pathologists' perceptions of types of feeding services feasible via telehealth and current use of telepractice To explore barriers and facilitators to the delivery of paediatric feeding services via telepractice	Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis	Barriers: technology failure, safety and efficacy of feeding service, lack of training and experience, family perceptions Facilitators: reduced travel times and costs, benefits families (by reducing family burden of attending appointments), naturalistic environment, potential to increase services, access to clinical support Descriptive: 41% interested in using telehealth for feeding support, 20% had used telehealth for feeding support, and 4% felt no feeding services could be provided via telehealth	Yes (selection)