Oral Presentation Clinical Oncology Society of Australia Annual Scientific Meeting 2021

Transition to telehealth in a pandemic – experiences of Victorians affected by cancer (#91)

Victoria White 1 2 , Alice Bastable 2 , Ilana Solo 3 , Seleena Sherwell 4 , Natalie Maxwell-Davis 5 , Kathy Alexander 5 , Rob Blum 6 , Javier Torres 7 , Amanda Piper 2
  1. Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia
  2. Cancer Council Victoria, Carlton, Vic, Australia
  3. Loddon Mallee Integrated Cancer Service, Bendigo, Victoria, Australia
  4. South Melbourne Integrated Cancer Services , Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  5. Consumer Representative, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  6. Bendigo Health, Bendigo, Victoria, Australia
  7. Goulburn Valley Health, Shepparton, Victoria, Australia

Background: For over 20 years, telehealth has delivered cancer care to Australians living in rural and remote areas. With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 telehealth was rapidly rolled-out throughout Australia. This study aimed to understand experience of telehealth by people affected by cancer.

Methods: Semi-structured interviews with patients and carers recruited through cancer networks and social media.  Participants were interviewed via telephone or online video link between December 2020 and May 2021. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis undertaken.

Results: 23 patients and 5 carers were interviewed with data saturation reached. Most reported telehealth was delivered via the telephone. Responses to telehealth were influenced by existing relationships with doctors, treatment/cancer stage, type of information delivered, and vulnerability felt in relation to the cancer.  While benefits of telehealth especially: reduced travel, waiting time and costs were noted, limitations were also mentioned including:  appointments feeling rushed, communication /rapport building difficulties, and quality of consultation and health monitoring concerns Most thought appointments with new doctors and when receiving bad news should be in-person. While carers' reported reduced travel as a benefit, phone appointments made it difficult for carers to participate. No participant reported being asked if a carer would be involved in the telehealth appointment. Despite these limitations, all thought telehealth should be retained, with patients wanting to choose when to have a telehealth or face-to-face appointment.

Conclusions: Despite some limitations, there was keen interest for telehealth to continue post-pandemic with people wanting choice regarding the type of appointment they have.  To assist patients and clinicians navigate telehealth, patient-centred guidelines and resources that ensure patient choice, aid communication may be useful. Hybrid models involving in-person and telehealth appointments may help to capitalise on telehealth’s benefits.