Despite the growth of telecommunication applications to provide clinical healthcare services, there has been little attention to the pedagogical framework needed to train healthcare students to deliver these services.
Methods
In this exploratory investigation, perceptions of speech-language pathology/therapy (SLP/SLT) faculty (n = 31), graduate students (n = 16), and telehealth (“telepractice”) clinicians (n = 16) were examined with a 15-item survey regarding the 1) comparative pedagogical importance of four skills common to telepractice and face-to-face service (f2f) delivery, and 2) relative pedagogical value of seven skills and competencies unique to telepractice.
Results
Statistical analyses revealed nonverbal communication skills and knowledge of the literature related to service delivery methods were more important in telepractice than in f2f service delivery. Among seven skills unique to telepractice, participants believed the most important was solving problems related to the Internet and recommended at least two hours of instruction each in telepractice technology, patient confidentiality, and role-playing telepractice. Results suggest that SLP/SLT students may need additional and/or focused academic training in nonverbal communication, telepractice literature, and in solving connectivity issues to enter the telepractice marketplace with sufficient preparation.
Discussion
Further study is needed to compare the relative importance of additional SLP/SLT skills and competencies, describe components of effective healthcare training telepractice programs, and explore effective pedagogical strategies for healthcare telepractice instruction.
LawJBoyleJHarrisF. Prevalence and natural history of primary speech and language delay: findings from a systematic review of the literature. Int J Lang Commun Disord2000; 35(2): 165–188.
2.
RubenRJ. Redefining the survival of the fittest: communication disorders in the 21st century. Laryngoscope2000; 110(2): 241–245.
TannerD. Medical-legal and forensic aspects of communication disorders, voice prints, and speaker profiling, Tucson, AZ: Lawyers & Judges Publishing Company, 2007, pp. 26–26.
5.
American Telemedicine Association. What is telemedicine? www.americantelemed.org (2012, accessed 20 April 2016).
6.
BrownJ. The state of telepractice in 2014. The ASHA Leader2014, pp. 19: 54–57.
7.
Grogan-JohnsonSMeehanRMcCormickK. Results of a national survey of preservice telepractice training in graduate speech-language pathology and audiology programs. Contemp Issues Commun Sci Disord2015; 42: 122–137.
8.
Stellmacher A. Perspectives on telepractice in speech-language pathology. In: American speech-language-hearing association convention. San Diego, CA, 17–19 November 2011.
McCarthyMCrutchleyS. Supervision and clinical practicum in telepractice. Perspect Admin Superv2011; 21: 30–34.
11.
McCarthyM. The RIDBC telepractice training protocol: a model for meeting ASHA roles and responsibilities. Perspect Telepractice2013; 3: 49–60.
12.
DavisAHopkinsTAbrahamsY. Maximizing the impact of telepractice through a multifaceted service delivery model at The Shepard Centre, Australia. Volta Rev2012; 112(3): 383–391.
13.
HamrenKQuigleyS. Implementing coaching in a natural environment through distance technologies. Volta Rev2012; 112(3): 403–407.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. Scope of practice in speech-language pathology [Scope of Practice], http://www.asha.org/policy/ (2016, accessed 1 April 2016).
16.
O’ConaillBWhittakerS. Conversations over video conferences: an evaluation of the spoken aspects of video-mediated communication. Hum-Comput Interact1993; 8: 389–428.
17.
Doherty-SneddoGAndersonAO’MalleyC. Face-to-face and video-mediated communication: a comparison of dialogue structure and task performance. J Exp Psychol-Appl1997; 3(2): 105–125.
18.
FerranCWattsS. Videoconferencing in the field: a heuristic processing model. Manage Sci2008; 54(9): 1565–1578.
19.
VasquesMS. Down to the fundamentals of telehealth and home healthcare nursing. Home Healthcare Nurse2008; 26(5): 281–287.
20.
Jacobson K and Hooke MC. Telehealth videoconferencing for children with hemophilia and their families: a clinical project. J Pediatr Oncol Nurs. Epub ahead of print 28 October 2015. DOI: 10.1177/1043454215607340.
21.
SanderAMClarkANAtchisonTB. A Web-based videoconferencing approach to training caregivers in rural areas to compensate for problems related to traumatic brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil2009; 24(4): 248–261.
22.
DustdarSHofstedeGJ. Videoconferencing across cultures – a conceptual framework for floor control issues. J Inform Technol1999; 14: 161–169.
23.
MastMS. On the importance of nonverbal communication in the physician-patient interaction. Patient Educ Couns2007; 67: 315–318.
24.
AmbacyNKooJRosenthalR. Physical therapists’ nonverbal communication predicts geriatric patients’ health outcomes. Pychol Aging2002; 17(3): 443–452.
25.
KockN. The psychobiological model: towards a new theory of computer-mediated communication based on Darwinian evolution. Organ Sci2004; 15: 327–348.
26.
HughesEM. Communication skills for telehealth interactions. Home Care Today2001; 19(8): 469–472.
27.
BuckleyKMTranBQPrandoniCM. Training future providers in home care and telehealth technologies: a collaborative effort between nursing and biomedical engineering. Home Healthc Nurse2002; 14(5): 362–371.
28.
MashimaPA. Using technology to improve access to health care for culturally and linguistically diverse populations. Perspec Commun Disord Sci CLD Popul2012; 19: 71–76.
29.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. Scope of practice in speech-language pathology [Scope of practice], http://www.asha.org/policy/ (2016, accessed 1 April 2016).
30.
TuckerJK. Perspectives of speech-language pathologists on the use of telepractice in schools: quantitative survey results. Int J Telerehabilitation2012; 4(2): 61–71.
31.
KeckCDoarnC. Telehealth technology applications in speech-language pathology. Telemed J E Health2014; 20: 653–659.
AlaviMWheelerBValacichJ. Using IT to reengineer business education: an exploratory investigation of collaborative telelearning. MIS Quarterly1995; 19(3): 293–312.
34.
MooreMTheory of transactional distance. In: KeeganD (ed). Theoretical principles of distance education, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 1997, pp. 22–38.
35.
WilsonSFMarksRCollinsN. Benefits of multidisciplinary case conferencing using audiovisual compared with telephone communication: a randomized controlled trial. J Telem Telecare2004; 10(6): 351–354.
36.
Perkins Walker J. University of Maine, Speech Therapy Telepractice and Technology Program Manual. University of Maine Faculty Monographs. Book 220. Orono, ME: University of Maine, 2015.
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). P.L. No. 104–191, 110 Stat. 1938, 1996.
39.
SheaSC. Psychiatric interviewing: the art of understanding, 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Sanders, 1998.
40.
EgolfDNonverbal communication and telerehabilitation. In: KumarSCohnE (eds). Telerehabilitation, New York: Springer, 2013, pp. 41–54.
41.
FoleyGGentileJ. Nonverbal communication in psychotherapy. Psychiatry2010; 7: 38–44.
42.
BurgoonJKGuerreroLKFloydK. Nonverbal communication, Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 2009.
43.
MehrabianA. Communication without words. Psychol Today1968; 2: 52–55.
44.
BrownJ. ASHA and the evolution of telepractice. Perspectives on Telepractice2011; 1: 4–9.
45.
CzajaSCharnessNFiskA. Factors predicting the use of technology: findings from the Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement (CREATE). Psychol Aging2006; 21: 333–352.
46.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. Survey report on telepractice use among audiologists and speech-language pathologists, www.asha.org (2002, accessed 16 June 2016).
47.
SelwynNGorardSFurlongJ. Older adults’ use of information and communications technology in everyday life. Ageing Soc2003; 23: 561–582.
48.
WangQMyersMDSundaramD. Digital natives and digital immigrants: towards a model of digital fluency. Bus Inf Syst Eng2013; 5(6): 409–419.
