Transition to a virtual model of physiotherapy and exercise physiology in response to COVID-19 for people in a rural Australia: Is it a viable solution to increase access to allied health for rural populations?

Virtual healthcare has the potential to increase access to allied health for people living in rural areas, but challenges in delivery of such models have been reported. The COVID-19 pandemic provided an opportunity for a rural practice of physiotherapists and exercise physiologists to transition service delivery to a virtual model of care which utilised a combination of phone, video, an exercise app and/or paper handouts. This study aimed to evaluate the uptake and outcomes from virtual delivery of allied health services, and to describe patient and clinician experiences of the virtual model of care. A parallel convergent mixed methods study was conducted. De-identified data from patients who were offered the virtual service between 15 March 2020 and 30 September 2020 were extracted from the database of the rural practice, as were data from patients attending the practice in-person during the same time in 2019 to serve as a historical comparison. De-identified data from a monthly survey tracking clinician experiences of delivering care virtually was also obtained from the practice. Quantitative data were presented descriptively. Between-group differences were compared using independent samples t-tests, and within-group longitudinal changes compared using paired t-tests. Semi-structured interviews were conducted among a purposive sample of patients using the virtual service, and focus groups conducted among clinicians providing this model of care. Qualitative data were recorded and transcribed verbatim, then thematic analysis conducted. During the study period, the practice delivered 4% (n = 242) consultations virtually. Thirty-seven of the 60 patients (62%) using the virtual service were new referrals. Patients attended fewer sessional appointments virtually and a smaller proportion of patients reported high satisfaction with virtual care, compared to those who received in-person care the previous year (p < .05). Clinician confidence in delivering virtual care did not change significantly over time (p>.05), though clinicians not providing virtual care in a given month perceived their lower confidence than those who did provide virtual care (p < .05). Five themes influencing the success of virtual allied health provision emerged from patient interviews and clinician focus groups: adaptation of program elements for virtual delivery, conduct of virtual treatment, clinician flexibility, patient complexity and communication. The theme of communication influenced all the other themes. Virtual healthcare is a potential solution to address lack of access to allied health practitioners in rural areas, but may not suit all patients. Establishing a therapeutic relationship and ensuring people have access to adequate resources prior to virtual care delivery will optimise successful adoption of virtual care models. A hybrid model incorporating limited in-person consultations with virtual consultations appears a more viable option.