Exploration of implementation, financial and technical considerations within allied health professional (AHP) telehealth consultation guidance: A scoping review including UK AHP professional bodies’ guidance

Objectives The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a shift to remote consultations, but telehealth consultation guidelines are lacking or inconsistent. Therefore, a scoping review was performed to chart the information in the articles exploring telehealth for the UK Allied Health Professionals (AHPs) and compare them with the UK AHP professional bodies’ guidelines. Design Scoping review following Aksey and O’ Malley methodological framework. Data Sources CINHAL and MEDLINE were searched from inception to March 2021 using terms related to “telehealth”, “guidelines” and “AHPs”. Additionally, the UK AHP professional bodies were contacted requesting their guidelines. Study selection: Articles exploring telehealth for patient consultations, written in English and published in peer-reviewed journal or guidelines available from UK AHP professional bodies/their websites, were considered eligible for review. Data extraction: One reviewer extracted data concerning three overarching domains: implementation, financial and technological considerations. Results 2,632 articles were identified through database searches with twenty-one articles eligible for review. Eight guidelines were obtained from the UK AHP professional bodies with a total of twenty-nine included articles/guidelines. Most articles were published in the last two years, there was variety in telehealth terminology, and most were developed for occupational therapists, physiotherapists and speech and language therapists. Information was lacking about the assessment of telehealth use and effectiveness, barriers and limitations, the logistical management, the family’s and caregiver’s roles, and the costs. There was lack of clarity on the AHPs’ registration requirements, costs and coverage, and legal aspects. Conclusion This study identified gaps in current guidelines, which showed similarities as well as discrepancies with the guidance for non-AHP healthcare professionals and revealed that the existing guidelines do not adequately support AHPs delivering telehealth. Future research and collaborative work across AHP groups and the world’s leading health institutions are suggested to establish common guidelines which will improve AHP telehealth services