Changes in telepractice use and perspectives among speech and language therapists in Singapore through the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Much has been written about the changes in use and perspectives of telepractice among speech and language therapists (SLTs) during the global COVID-19 pandemic. However, no long-term study has been done to examine whether there is a permanent shift in attitudes towards telepractice as the world adjusts to new norms and endemic COVID-19. AIMS: To compare the speech telepractice use and perspectives of SLTs at two time points of the pandemic: during and after the height of the pandemic. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Two online surveys were distributed a year apart among SLTs in Singapore. The first survey was disseminated during an initial lockdown period in 2020 and the second survey was done in 2021 when Singapore was starting to reduce strict quarantine and safe-distancing regulations. These surveys were distributed via communication channels of the local speech therapy association. A total of 115 and 71 responses to the survey were collected in 2020 and 2021, respectively. Responses were captured and analysed using descriptive statistics and statistical analysis while qualitative content analysis was used to derive key themes from open-ended questions. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Telepractice use across all age groups and client types peaked at the height of the pandemic. Even as lockdown measures were eased, telepractice utilization was still higher than what it was before the pandemic. Dysphagia management was the only area where SLTs reduced their use of telepractice during the stabilization phase. After more experience with telepractice during the height of the pandemic, SLTs acknowledged the benefit of being able to use a wide range of media through telepractice and were less worried about not having the resources or knowledge to set up telepractice. SLTs also reported increased confidence in providing telepractice, which was reflected in their willingness to continue to provide telepractice even after the pandemic ends. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: The increase in use of telepractice during this pandemic is likely to be sustained as a majority of respondents believed they would continue to provide this mode of service delivery even after the pandemic ends. However, clinicians will still have to assess for client suitability, as clients with more complex medical or behavioural issues may still require in-person therapy. Additionally, dysphagia management via telepractice will still be limited given that swallow presentations may be more variable. Lastly, although generic resources are helpful for clinicians, the long-term sustainability of telepractice can be boosted by the sharing of resources that are suitable for the local context. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject Current studies have examined telepractice use and perspectives of SLTs before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite the evidence for the efficacy of telepractice, uptake was low due to perceived lack of training and resources. Although more clinicians provided telepractice during the pandemic, many still doubted its efficacy over in-person therapy and most studies concluded that longer term studies are required to ascertain if SLTs will continuing providing telepractice after the pandemic. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study shows that there is a definitive shift in perspectives in favour of telepractice after the pandemic, as clinicians continued to provide telepractice across most service areas even without lockdown restrictions. The previous challenges of insufficient resources, knowledge and privacy concerns were reduced with more experience in providing telepractice. Although client suitability remained a major barrier, more clinicians saw benefits of easy access to therapy and range of resources used as benefits that they could harness from telepractice. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? A majority of respondents stated that they are more confident in providing telepractice and would want to continue providing this service delivery mode after the pandemic, so more training and resources suitable for the local contexts can be provided by national associations to sustain this. More research and resources can be gathered to make telepractice more efficacious for dysphagia management and clients who may be deemed unsuitable for telepractice.

Cost-effectiveness of sub-national geographically targeted vaccination programs: A systematic review.

Immunization is an essential component of national health plans. However, the growing number of new vaccine introductions, vaccination campaigns and increasing administrative costs create logistic and financial challenges, especially in resource-limited settings. Sub-national geographic targeting of vaccination programs is a potential strategy for governments to reduce the impact of infectious disease outbreaks while optimizing resource allocation and reducing costs, promoting sustainability of critically important national immunization plans. We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature to identify studies that investigated the cost-effectiveness of geographically targeted sub-national vaccination programs, either through routine immunization or supplementary immunization activities. A total of 16 studies were included in our review, covering nine diseases of interest: cholera, dengue, enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC), hepatitis A, Japanese encephalitis, measles, rotavirus, Shigella and typhoid fever. All studies modelled cost-effectiveness of geographically targeted vaccination. Despite the variation in study design, disease focus and country context, studies generally found that in countries where a heterogenous burden of disease exists, sub-national geographic targeting of vaccination programs in areas of high disease burden was more cost-effective than a non-targeted strategy. Sensitivity analysis revealed that cost-effectiveness was most sensitive to variations in vaccine price, vaccine efficacy, mortality rate, administrative and operational costs, discount rate, and treatment costs. This systematic review identified several key characteristics related to geographic targeting of vaccination, including the vaccination strategy used, variations in modelling parameters and their impact on cost-effectiveness. Additional research and guidance is needed to support the appropriateness and feasibility of geographically targeted vaccination and to determine what country context would make this a viable complement to routine immunization programs.