Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Despite a rapid increase in telehealth utilization, older adults disproportionately experience disparities to services. To promote telehealth accessibility among this population, there is a need for specific training to increase user perceived competency. For this sequential mixed-methods study, we designed telehealth education modules through consultation with older adults. We then evaluated their impact on older adults’ perceived telehealth competency. To solicit feedback on preliminary modules, we administered a semi-structured interview to a sample (n = 5) of older adults; then, we assessed the revised modules’ impact on perceived competency among a sample of older adults (n = 53). Participants critiqued the preliminary training materials as having limited information on telehealth privacy and advised increasing the accessibility of design. Those that completed the revised modules demonstrated significant improvements in perceived telehealth competence. Telehealth training modules may be a promising method to increase perceived telehealth competency among older adults.

Keywords

older adults vulnerable populations services public health accessibility

Telehealth, which is the process of providing health care services through internet enabled technologies (American Occupational Therapy Association [AOTA], 2018), is an increasingly adopted practice innovation. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic was a pivotal catalyst for this trend, wherein April 2020 (i.e., the first month following declaration of a global pandemic by the World Health Organization [WHO]) saw an 8,336% increase in utilization from the year prior (FAIR Health, 2020). Beyond the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth continues to account for 5.4% of health care claims (FAIR Health, 2022). Key drivers for adoption of telehealth include improved health informatics technologies, health care policy and financing, consumer demand, as well as a growing body of evidence supporting outcomes (Center for Connected Health Policy [CCHP], 2014; Gajarawala & Pelkowski, 2021). However, adoption of telehealth among older adults is challenged by more barriers to access and usability than other age groups (Kalicki et al., 2021).

With the population of older adults expected to double by the year 2050 (WHO, 2022), equitable and accessible health services will be a critical need. If present trends continue, during this timeframe, approximately two thirds of older adults will be managing multiple chronic conditions (Boersma et al., 2020). However, older adults disproportionately experience disparities to health care access (American Geriatrics Society, 2020; Peckham et al., 2021). Targeting these inequities, the Institute for Healthcare Improvement first proposed the Triple Aim as a treatise to improve the U.S. health care system by targeting population health outcomes, while simultaneously lowering associated costs, and improving the patient experience (Berwick et al., 2008; Dirnberger & Waisbren, 2020). Bodenheimer and Sinsky (2014) have proposed an additional aim of enhancing health care provider work life to reduce incidence of professional burnout. Now recognized as the Quadruple aim, it is widely embraced as a foregoing framework for evidence-based health care improvement (Nundy et al., 2022). Telehealth is one means to help achieve the Quadruple Aim, and adoption of telehealth by allied health services, particularly occupational therapy, will be critical to achieve this goal (Cason, 2015).

Growing evidence supports the role of occupational therapy and other allied health services in addressing the Quadruple Aim. Studies by Little, Pope, et al. (2018), Gately et al. (2020), Saragih et al. (2022), and Scott et al. (2022) have identified improved or equitable patient outcomes through the use of telehealth. Furthermore, decreased cost and travel demands, as well as increased scheduling flexibility and timeliness, result in improved client (Charters et al., 2022; Eddison et al., 2022; Goldberg et al., 2022) and provider experiences (Eddison et al., 2022; Ervin et al., 2021; Little, Wallisch, et al., 2018; Smith et al., 2022). Despite these benefits, the forecast for telehealth remains tentative for occupational therapy, clouded by an absence of long-term reimbursement policies and contextual barriers limiting adoption.

Among contextual factors, access to high-speed internet–enabled technology is a requisite for telehealth utilization. While internet usage is at its highest point in history, 7% of individuals within the United States remain offline (Perrin & Atske, 2021). Age is the primary discriminating factor among this cohort, wherein 25% of individuals above 65 years report never going online (Perrin & Atske, 2021). Furthermore, internet nonuse, respectively, accounts for 14% individuals with fewer than 12 years of education or from a household with less than US$30,000 in income (Perrin & Atske, 2021).

Once online, additional barriers that delay the adoption of telehealth among older adults include a lack of perceived competency in using requisite technologies and processes associated with telehealth visits. Edwards et al. (2014) identified confidence to be a cross-cutting determinant of telehealth adoption across demographics of health status, age, and socioeconomic factors. This is supported by Hawley et al. (2020), who found 68% of older adults sampled were interested in telehealth, yet only 42% reported confidence in using it. In addition to confidence, Vaportzis et al. (2017) found a lack of accessible training and technology-specific knowledge to be additional barriers. Despite these barriers, older adults express a willingness to adopt telehealth to access services that would facilitate independent living (Edwards et al., 2014; Qin, 2022; Vaportzis et al., 2017). Targeted and accessible training is critical for adoption among this population (Carroll et al., 2022).

Occupational therapy practitioners (OTPs) have unique professional expertise in promoting accessible participation, including with telehealth (Abbott-Gaffney et al., 2022). We feel this expertise may be leveraged to develop telehealth training for older adults. Therefore, to address this need, the purpose of this exploratory sequential mixed-methods study was to (a) describe the development of a website housing asynchronous and accessible telehealth education modules (TEMs) targeting the needs of older adults, and (b) evaluate the extent to which TEMs improve self-perceived telehealth competency for older adults. In the quantitative phase, we hypothesized that participants would report higher competency after completion of TEMs. Findings of this study will align with the PACE Framework, which seeks to advance evidence-based telehealth service delivery for occupational therapy through research (Little et al., 2021), thus enhancing participation for our future clients.

Method

The current study used an exploratory sequential mixed-methods approach (Creswell et al., 2003), in which we began with a qualitative approach to evaluate of the content and format of initial TEMs (i-TEMs) followed by a quantitative approach to evaluate the extent to which revised TEMs may influence competency in telehealth use among older adults. Within mixed-methods, decisions are made related to timing of data collection and mixing (relating the two data sets) of each approach (Creswell & Clark, 2007). For the current study, we collected qualitative data prior to implementing changes to the revised TEMs based on stakeholder feedback, and then collected the quantitative data from a larger sample of older adults. We did not mix the two data sets; instead, we revised the TEMs based on the qualitative feedback. Then, in the quantitative phase, we evaluated the extent to which the revised TEMs influenced perceived competency among older adults who completed the training.

TEM Development and Refinement

We designed i-TEMs content through a review of literature on telehealth education and training recommendations provided by the National Academic Consortium of Telehealth (Hollander et al., 2018), Papanagnou et al. (2015), and the American Telemedicine Association (ATMA, 2011). Literature on efficacious telehealth training programs for allied health providers, supplemental best practice guidelines for clinical interactions, and interprofessional communications all served as a theoretical foundation for the i-TEMs. We adapted these clinically oriented recommendations to target the learning needs of telehealth care recipients. We developed the initial modules (prior to qualitative participant review) between October 15, 2020 and December 30, 2020. We obtained approval from our university’s institutional review board, and all participants provided electronic consent via REDCap (Harris et al., 2019) to participate in the study.

Participants

For the qualitative phase of the study, we recruited a convenience sample of older adults from our university’s Center for Excellence in Aging’s list of community volunteers. To be eligible, qualitative participants needed to be 60 years or older, be community-dwelling, and have access to an internet enabled device to complete the i-TEMs. We sent email invitations to n = 8 potential participants, and n = 5 agreed to participate. Demographics of this sample included mean age 71 years (range: 60–78 years); two participants identified as Black or African American, one as White, and two preferred not to respond.

For the quantitative phase of the study, we recruited a convenience sample of older adults with one or more chronic health conditions from a list of volunteers participating with a service-learning, university-wide interprofessional education course at Rush University. To be eligible quantitative participants needed to be 60 years or older, community-dwelling, and have one or more chronic health condition. We excluded any individual who lacked consistent access to an internet-enabled device. Quantitative participants needed to complete pre- and poststudy questionnaires and all TEMs to be classified as completing all study procedures. Quantitative sample demographics and level of study procedure completion may be found in Table 1.

Table 1.

Participant Demographics Grouped by Study Procedures Completion.

Demographic feature	Total sample that completed prequestionnairen = 94 (100%)	Completed pre- but not postquestionnaire or all TEMsn = 41 (43.6%)	Completed pre-, postquestionnaires, and all TEMsn = 53 (56.4%)
Age, years	M = 71.65 (SD = 6.82)Range = 60–88	M = 71.61 (SD = 7.186)Range = 60–88	M = 71.68 (SD = 6.58)Range = 60–88
Annual median household income of zip code
15,000–34,999	12 (12.8)	7 (17.1)	5 (9.4)
35,000–49,999	26 (27.7)	10 (24.4)	16 (30.2)
50,000–74,999	23 (24.5)	13 (31.7)	10 (18.9)
75,000–99,999	15 (16.0)	4 (9.8)	11 (20.8)
100,000–149,000	15 (16.0)	7 (17.1)	8 (15.1)
150,000+	3 (3.2)	0 (0)	3 (5.7)
Race
Asian	1 (1.1)	1 (2.4)	0 (0)
Black or African American	35 (37.2)	18 (43.9)	17 (32.1)
White	42 (44.7)	14 (34.1)	28 (52.8)
Multiracial	1 (1.1)	1 (2.4)	0 (0)
Unknown	1 (1.1)	0 (0)	1 (1.9)
Prefer not to report	14 (14.9)	7 (17.1)	7 (13.2)
Ethnicity
Hispanic or Latino	12 (12.8)	7 (17.1)	5 (9.4)
Not Hispanic or Latino	69 (73.4)	29 (70.7)	40 (75.5)
Prefer not to report	13 (13.8)	5 (12.2)	8 (15.1)
Gender
Female	66 (70.2)	27 (65.9)	39 (73.6)
Male	13 (13.8)	7 (17.1)	6 (11.3)
Prefer not to report	15 (16.0)	7 (17.1)	8 (15.1)
Previous use of telehealth
Yes	41 (43.6)	18 (43.9)	23 (43.4)
No	53 (56.4)	23 (56.1)	30 (56.6)

Procedures and Measures

Qualitative

After qualitative participants viewed our i-TEMs, we used a phone-delivered semi-structured questionnaire to evaluate acceptability and solicit any recommended modifications. Specifically, we asked six open-ended questions to garner feedback on improvements to the content of each module in addition to a question about how we could improve the accessibility of the modules overall (available as Supplemental Table 1). The first author (ST) administered the questionnaire over the phone and recorded all participant responses.

Quantitative

We collected quantitative participants’ demographic information and administered the Telehealth Competency Questionnaire-Consumer (TCQ-C; Taylor & Little, 2023) before viewing and following completion of the revised TEMs. The TCQ-C is a 13-item assessment of client or patient perceptions of their telehealth knowledge, skills, and attitudes related to five domains: (a) telehealth practice fundamentals, (b) troubleshooting, (c) care planning, (d) therapeutic rapport, and (e) team-based care. The TCQ-C is scored on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = highly agree to 5 = highly disagree; a lower score is favorable) and demonstrates moderate, positive concurrent validity with the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire—Usefulness subscale (r = .728, p < .001) and factor analysis reveals the 13-item questionnaire items load on one factor which explains 66.66% of sample variance (Taylor & Little, 2023).

Data Analysis

Qualitative

Three authors (ST, LL, JO) read all participant feedback separately and quantified common topics (Chi, 1997). This approach allowed us to quantify the number of instances in which respondents reported that specific changes were needed. The three authors separately created a coding scheme, met to discuss and finalized a coding scheme, then went back to the data to recode the responses based on the coding scheme. Then, all authors discussed how participants’ suggestions could be synthesized, brainstormed strategies to implement changes, and agreed on specific changes to implement for the TEMs. Finally, we revised TEMs into a final form for the quantitative phase of the study.

Quantitative

We used chi-square analyses to investigate the extent to which demographic characteristics (i.e., gender, annual median household income of zip code, minority race, and ethnicity status) and prior experience (i.e., prior telehealth use) may have differed between the group that completed all study procedures versus those who did not. Quantitative participants were considered to have completed all study procedures if they completed both pre- and poststudy questionnaires and reported fully completing all five TEMs. Then, to address our primary research question, we ran nonparametric and parametric paired tests using individual item and the total mean TCQ-C scores to examine the extent to which older adults’ engagement with revised TEMs influenced their perceived self-competency to use telehealth.

Results

Qualitative

As a result of the qualitative older adults’ feedback on i-TEMs, our research team made specific changes to the content and quality of the modules as outlined below.

Accessibility

The primary concern reported by four of the five respondents was regarding the accessibility of the i-TEMs. Overall, participants suggested that the narration be slower, less complex, and asked for closed captioning as an automatic feature (vs. having to change settings to enable). Therefore, we revisited all language used throughout the modules to ensure a seventh-grade reading level (to align with average-difficulty health literacy accessibility recommendations from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2010), reduced the speed of narration, and enabled closed captioning. Furthermore, based on feedback, we introduced definitions for technical jargon words such as “Wi-Fi” and “login.”

Beyond the content of the i-TEMs, qualitative participants provided additional suggestions for the hosting website. Two individuals expressed the need for written directions to use distinct types of videoconferencing software. Therefore, we created step-by-step guides that were available through word documents, PDFs, and embedded within the training website with written and visual descriptions. One participant suggested that we add video examples of telehealth for additional learning tools, so we collaborated with a simulation center to create vignettes for each module, exemplifying learning objectives through a simulated telehealth encounter. In addition, we introduced accessibility tools within the website to support navigation.

Privacy

Two qualitative participants reported unresolved concerns related to the privacy of their information when using telehealth, and the overall privacy of the i-TEMs hosting website itself. Participants suggested i-TEMs include specific information that addressed technical methods for ensuring security of private health information (e.g., not using public networks, means of determining whether a communication is encrypted). Furthermore, there was a concern regarding our original web domain (i.e., “.training”), which was thought to potentially be malicious as it was not a more commonly used “.com” or “.org.” Therefore, we changed the revised TEMs hosting website’s domain to be “.org.” See Table 2 for the revised TEMs, learning materials, and associated learning objectives.

Table 2.

Revised Telehealth Education Modules’ (TEMs) Learning Materials and Objectives.

Module	Learning materials	Learning objectives
Telehealth: An Introduction (https://accesstelehealthtraining.org/telehealth-an-introduction/)	• Training Video (6:16 min; CC) • Video Example (2:44 min; Closed Captioning Enabled) • Quick Guide (Written Document; .pdf Format)	• Describe Telehealth and how it allows for health services. • Identify things to consider when deciding to use Telehealth • Identify strategies to ensure Telehealth privacy • Describe limitations of Telehealth
Troubleshooting Telehealth Sessions (https://accesstelehealthtraining.org/troubleshooting-telehealth-sessions/)	• Training Video (8:17 min; CC) • Video Example (1:30 min; CC) • Quick Guide (Written Document; .pdf Format)	• Identify equipment necessary to participate with Telehealth. • Summarize strategies to prepare your technology and environment for a Telehealth session. • Describe procedures for troubleshooting Telehealth technology. • Articulate strategies to provide Telehealth accommodations.
The Telehealth Therapeutic Relationship: Developing Virtual Rapport (https://accesstelehealthtraining.org/developing-a-healthcare-relationship-through-telehealth/)	• Training Video (8:58 min; CC) • Video Example (1:42 min; CC) • Quick Guide (Written Document; .pdf Format)	• Explain the value of a therapeutic Telehealth provider relationship. • Identify environmental best practices for Telehealth sessions. • Outline strategies to enhance Telehealth discussions. • Describe how to advocate for your Telehealth needs.
Team-based Care for Telehealth (https://accesstelehealthtraining.org/team-based-care-for-telehealth/)	• Training Video (6:24 min; CC) • Video Example (1:47 min; CC) • Quick Guide (Written Document; .pdf Format)	• Identify team-based care and its value for Telehealth. • Describe roles and duties of Telehealth team members. • Describe effective communication with a Telehealth team. • Identify strategies to develop health care goals with a Telehealth team.
Telehealth Care Planning (https://accesstelehealthtraining.org/telehealth-care-planning/)	• Training Video (8:12 min; CC) • Video Example (3:33 min; CC) • Quick Guide (Written Document; .pdf Format)	• Describe types of Telehealth assessments your provider may use. • Identify how telehealth providers may understand your needs through Telehealth. • Describe the importance of shared decision-making for Telehealth. • Outline processes for Telehealth follow-up.

Note. CC = closed captioning enabled.

Quantitative

In the second phase of the study, we evaluated the extent to which revised TEMs impacted the perceived competency for telehealth utilization among older adults. Fifty-three (56.4%) quantitative participants completed all study procedures (i.e., both pre- and poststudy questionnaires, as well as all five TEMs) of our original sample of 94. Overall, chi-square analyses indicated that those that completed all study procedures did not significantly differ from those that did not on the basis of racial minority status (χ²(1) = 3.040, p = .081), Hispanic ethnicity (χ²(1) = 1.101, p = .294), or gender (χ²(1) = 0.741, p = .389). In addition, analyses showed no significant differences among these groups based on previous use of telehealth (χ²(1) = .002, p = .961). Median household income of zip code had a significant association with study procedures completion (χ²(2) = 7.693, p = .021), wherein lower median income was associated with lower completion and higher median income demonstrated the opposite effect. To further explore the impact of median household income of zip code, we ran an analysis of variance (ANOVA) on baseline TCQ-C mean scores and found no significant difference among groups (F(2, 93) = .280, p = .757).

Paired pre- and poststatistics were run on individual TCQ-C items and median score (nonparametric and parametric tests, respectively). Data showed that participants reported significantly improved perceived competency to use telehealth following completion of revised TEMs (see Table 3). Specifically, participants reported improvements in all but one item of the TCQ-C, as well as a significant improvement on the mean total TCQ-C score. Cohen’s d for the change in mean TCQ-C score (0.608) indicated a medium effect size, with individual items’ effect sizes ranging from 0.302 to 0.834 (i.e., small [Cohen’s d > 0.2] medium [Cohen’s d > 0.5] to large [Cohen’s d > 0.8]; Cohen, 1998; Table 3).

Table 3.

Telehealth Competency Questionnaire—Consumer (TCQ-C) Results.

Telehealth Competency Questionnaire—Consumer Item	Pre-TEMsTCQ-C ratingsM (SD)	Post-TEMsTCQ-C ratingsM (SD)	Test statistic^a	Significance(p value, two-tailed)	Effect size (Cohen’s d)
I have knowledge of how to use Telehealth services	2.51 (1.20)	1.89 (.87)	3.929	<.001	0.593**
I have knowledge of what to do in case of an emergency when using of Telehealth.	3.13 (1.23)	2.23 (1.03)	4.470	<.001	0.800***
I feel my privacy is secure when using Telehealth.	2.38 (1.02)	1.79 (0.82)	4.284	<.001	0.632**
I can problem-solve steps to take if Telehealth technology does not work.	2.70 (1.14)	2.30 (1.09)	2.306	.021	0.357*
I have knowledge of ways Telehealth can be adapted to meet my needs.	2.74 (1.13)	1.94 (0.93)	4.210	<.001	0.767**
I have knowledge of the process of Telehealth care planning.	2.83 (1.05)	2.02 (0.89)	4.607	<.001	0.834***
I feel I can have a shared role in health care decisions through Telehealth.	2.21 (0.91)	1.85 (0.91)	2.846	.004	0.395*
I can make my needs be known to care providers when using Telehealth.	2.09 (0.88)	1.77 (0.87)	2.611	.009	0.366*
I feel a therapeutic (caring) relationship with my Telehealth care providers is of value.	1.98 (0.95)	1.72 (0.79)	2.506	.012	0.302*
I have knowledge of how to set up my surroundings for a Telehealth session.	2.42 (1.05)	1.92 (0.94)	3.239	.001	0.494*
I can communicate clearly when using Telehealth.	2.30 (0.99)	1.91 (0.90)	3.006	.003	0.417*
I can work together with multiple care providers through Telehealth.	2.38 (0.97)	1.89 (0.82)	3.497	<.001	0.547**
I feel I can be an active member of my health care team through Telehealth.	2.08 (0.90)	1.85 (0.89)	1.861	.063	—
Mean TCQ-C score	2.44 (0.86)	1.94 (0.78)	t = 5.135	<.001	0.608**

Note. The TCQ-C utilizes a five-level Likert-type scale for all items (“1” = strongly agree, “2” = agree, “3” = neutral, “4” = disagree, “5” = strongly disagree).

Expressed as Z unless otherwise indicated.

Small effect size. **Medium effect size. ***Large effect size (Cohen, 1988).

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to describe the development and exploratory evaluation of TEMs on client-perceived telehealth competency targeting the needs of older adults. We found that consultation with this population throughout the developmental process of the TEMs website allowed for valuable insights into the unique needs and perspectives of this population. Specifically, stakeholders shared strategies that would increase the accessibility of the materials as well as ways to address privacy concerns within the modules. Accessibility of training materials and resources to promote competence of telehealth is critical to reducing disparities to health service access experienced by this population (Carroll et al., 2022) and improving client experiences as part of the Quadruple Aim (Bodenheimer & Sinsky, 2014). Novel findings from this study also showed that online training materials, when adapted to meet older adults’ needs, may be efficacious in increasing their perceived competence and confidence to use telehealth.

During the qualitative phase, consultation with the stakeholder group of older adults for i-TEMs review revealed two key areas of need. The first was a concern regarding accessibility, here defined as the presentation of information within the i-TEMs website, including format, speech, and language use. This reported concern aligns with previous findings by Vaportzis et al. (2017), Eddison et al. (2022), and Charters et al. (2022), who found that perceived complexity with technologies increased feelings of inadequacy among this population. The second was a concern about the availability of telehealth privacy and information security safeguards. Unlike the first area of concern, which was related to the presentation of information within the i-TEMs, this critique was due to insufficient content related to this specific knowledge area. While this report for our study was specific to the concerns of older adults, this finding aligns with Edwards et al. (2014), who found that concerns related to security was a cross-cutting perceived disadvantage of telehealth for all age groups.

Beyond the present study and associated TEM development, telehealth concerns expressed by older adults bear relevance to OTPs. Among health care professionals, OTPs are experts in occupational analysis and promotion of accessibility, expertise that can be leveraged to promote health service access through this medium. Furthermore, through application of these professional skills to secure telehealth access and provide subsequent services, OTPs are distinctly suited to advance population health and advance the Quadruple Aim (Abbott-Gaffney et al., 2022; Cason, 2015; Proffitt et al., 2021). The role of OTPs in addressing these concerns and providing these services is further supported by AOTA (2018) in a position paper concerning the subject, and aligns with the PACE Framework research agenda (Little et al., 2021).

Through the quantitative phase of our investigation, we were able to examine the impact of revised TEMs through both levels of study completion and change in perceived competency. A majority of this sample completed all study procedures (i.e., both pre- and postquestionnaires, and all TEMs). With the exception of median household income of zip code, no participant demographic feature was significantly associated with attrition. For demographic categories of gender, race, ethnicity, this suggests random study attrition, and that none of these participant subgroups disproportionately experienced difficulty with study procedures (i.e., completion of questionnaires and TEM trainings). As lower median household income of zip code was associated with study procedure attrition, we feel this suggests this group experienced additional challenges in completing study procedures comprising electronic survey completion and online TEMs. This barrier, additionally found by Eddison et al. (2022), should be recognized by providers adopting similar telehealth trainings.

With the majority of the quantitative sample completing all study procedures, we feel this suggests a general interest among our sample in completion of the revised TEM trainings, a finding also found among the samples of Edwards et al. (2014) and Qin (2022). We feel this cross-cutting level of interest in gaining telehealth competency demonstrates a need within this field and suggests practitioners have resources to support this need among potential clients.

Our data provided support for preliminary evaluation of TEMs toward increasing perceived competency to utilize telehealth services among older adults. Significant improvements in the mean total and all but one individual TCQ-C items indicated that TEMs may be effective at increasing perceived competency to participate with telehealth services among this population. Furthermore, the medium magnitude of change for the TCQ-C mean suggests that the TEMs are more likely to have generated a meaningful change in perceived competency among our sample.

Our process for development of TEMs and the subsequent investigation into larger-scale efficacy must be interpreted with recognition of study limitations. One limitation is a sampling bias, as our recruitment procedures included acquiring two convenience samples from a pool of volunteers for a program internal to our home institution (i.e., Rush University). Participation with previous programming among these cohorts may have biased their response to TEMs, as well as could a geographical bias (as many center volunteers are within the Chicago metropolitan area). In addition, the sample for our qualitative semi-structured interviews was small and may not adequately represent the diverse range of perceptions of the older adult population. Future inquiries into the efficacy of targeted telehealth training should aim to capture a broader range of participants.

This study’s findings cannot be separated from the time period during which the TEMs were created and evaluated—specifically, December 31, 2020 to February 28, 2021. This period is associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, wherein Telehealth utilization and use of teleconferencing platforms significantly increased (American Telehealth Association [ATA], 2021; Perrin & Atske, 2021). This historical context poses a threat to our study’s external validity. With trends of increasing Telehealth adoption and utilization expected to continue (Perrin & Atske, 2021), telehealth technologies, practices, and requisite-associated consumer training will similarly need to evolve. Therefore, we recognize our TEMs, and similar client-focused telehealth trainings, should iteratively reflect contemporary practices to best meet older adults’ unique needs. Furthermore, as this population becomes more competent with entry-level telehealth practices, more advanced training and future investigation may be beneficial. We recommend involvement of this population throughout the development process of such training.

To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study describing the development and influence of telehealth training targeting the unique needs of older adults. Important within the context of this study, we did not use perceived competency (a self-report, quantified by the TCQ-C) as a proxy metric for true competency to use telehealth services. We believe perceived competency to be analogous to confidence, a construct associated with telehealth interest (Edwards et al., 2014) and technology adoption (Vaportzis et al., 2017).

All study procedures, including development of TEMs, were completed by an interprofessional team inclusive of multiple OTPs. We feel the diversity of professional expertise, including consultation with older adults during the qualitative phase, contributed to the study’s outcomes. Furthermore, we feel OTPs offer a unique professional perspective for this area of practice, recognizing aspects of universal design, accessibility, and client factors that restrict access among populations. We feel that OTPs can additionally contribute to this area by applying their unique understanding of the therapeutic relationship and the influence of rapport on telehealth outcomes through future studies. Such investigations may target training for providers, or instead be directed at telehealth clients, enabling them to advocate for a therapeutic relationship with their telehealth providers.

Conclusion

Findings of this study suggest that the barriers to telehealth services disproportionately experienced by older adults may be mitigated through targeted client-focused training. A team of interprofessional health care practitioners, led by and inclusive of multiple OTPs, and in consultation with older adults, created the TEMs and hosting website (available at https://accesstelehealthtraining.org/) developed and evaluated in this study. We feel that the unique perspectives of both OTPs and older adults contributed to the trainings’ influence on older adults’ perceived competency in using telehealth by targeting the specific needs of this population. Furthermore, our findings provide empirical support that older adults who completed TEMs reported increased perceived competency to use telehealth. These findings are especially critical given the combined effects of an increasing population of aging adults, advancements in health care technologies, and a need for increased health care accessibility.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-otj-10.1177_15394492231153115 – Supplemental material for Enhancing Telehealth Competency: Development and Evaluation of Education Modules for Older Adults

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-otj-10.1177_15394492231153115 for Enhancing Telehealth Competency: Development and Evaluation of Education Modules for Older Adults by Steven Taylor, Samantha Souza, Lauren Little and Jan Odiaga in OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health

Footnotes

Ethical Approval

This study was approved by Rush University Medical Center’s Institutional Review Board, #18010401-IRB01.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Funding from this study was provided by Rush University Medical Center’s Center for Excellence in Aging.

ORCID iDs

Steven Taylor

Lauren Little

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Abbott-Gaffney

C. R.

Gafni-Lachter

L. L.

Cason

Sheaffer

Harasink

Donehower

Jacobs

(2022). Toward successful future use of telehealth in occupational therapy practice: What the COVID-19 rapid shift revealed. IOS Press, 71(2), 385–394.

American Geriatrics Society. (2020). Training for geriatricians: Education & training. https://www.americangeriatrics.org/geriatrics-profession/training-requirements/training-geriatricians

American Occupational Therapy Association. (2018). Telehealth in occupational therapy. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 72(Suppl2), 7212410059. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2018.72S219

American Telehealth Association. (2020). Telehealth: Defining 21st century care. https://marketing.americantelemed.org/hubfs/Files/Resources/ATA_Telehealth_Taxonomy_9-11-20.pdf

American Telemedicine Association. (2011). Videoconferencing-based telepresenting: Expert consensus recommendations. https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/5096139/NEW_ATA-VideoConference-Based-2.pdf

Berwick

D. M.

Nolan

T. W.

Whittington

(2008). The triple aim: Care, health, and cost. Health Affairs (Project Hope), 27(3), 759–769. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.27.3.759

Bodenheimer

Sinsky

(2014). From triple to quadruple aim: Care of the patient requires care of the provider. Annals of Family Medicine, 12(6), 573–576. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1713

Boersma

Black

L. I.

Ward

B. W.

(2020). Prevalence of multiple chronic conditions among us adults, 2018. Preventing Chronic Disease, 17, 200130. https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd17.200130external icon

Carroll

Sworn

Booth

Tsuchiya

Maden

Rosenberg

(2022). Equity in healthcare access and service coverage for older people: A scoping review of the conceptual literature. Integrated Healthcare Journal, 4(1), e000092. https://doi.org/10.1136/ihj-2021-000092

10.

Cason

(2015). Telehealth and occupational therapy: Integral to the triple aim of health care reform. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 69(2), 6902090010p1–6902090010p8. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2015.692003

11.

Center for Connected Health Policy. (2014, September). Recommendations from the CCHP telehealth and the triple aim project: Advancing telehealth knowledge and practice. https://www.cchpca.org/2021/04/Telehealth-Triple-Aim-Report-2_0.pdf

12.

Charters

Khom

M. J.

Baker

Lindsay

(2022). Patient satisfaction and cost analysis of telehealth delivered by allied health oncology clinicians. Wspolczesna Onkologia, 26(1), 44–48. https://doi.org/10.5114/wo.2022.115047

13.

Chi

M. T.

(1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(3), 271–315. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0603_1

14.

Cohen

(1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Routledge Academic.

15.

Creswell

J. W.

Clark

V. L. P.

(2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. SAGE.

16.

Creswell

J. W.

Clark

V. L. P.

Gutmann

M. L.

Hanson

W. E.

(2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research, 209(240), 209–240.

17.

Dirnberger

Waisbren

(2020). Efficacy of telehealth visits for postoperative care at the Minneapolis VA. The American Journal of Surgery, 220(3), 721–724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2020.01.015

18.

Eddison

Leone

Healy

Royse

Chockalingam

(2022). The potential impact of allied health professional telehealth consultations on health inequities and the burden of treatment. International Journal for Equity in Health, 21(1), Article 91. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-022-01689-2

19.

Edwards

Thomas

Gregory

Yardley

O’Cathain

Montgomery

A. A.

Salisbury

(2014). Are people with chronic diseases interested in using telehealth? A cross-sectional postal survey. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 16(5), e123. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.3257

20.

Ervin

Weller-Newton

Phillips

(2021). Primary healthcare clinicians’ positive perceptions of the implementation of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic using normalization process theory. Australian Journal of Primary Health, 27(2), 158–162. https://doi.org/10.1071/PY20182

21.

FAIR Health. (2020). Monthly telehealth regional tracker (April, 2020) [Infographic]. https://s3.amazonaws.com/media2.fairhealth.org/infographic/telehealth/apr-2020-national-telehealth.pdf

22.

FAIR Health. (2022). Monthly telehealth regional tracker (August, 2022) [Infographic]. https://s3.amazonaws.com/media2.fairhealth.org/infographic/telehealth/aug-2022-national-telehealth.pdf

23.

Gajarawala

S. N.

Pelkowski

J. N.

(2021). Telehealth benefits and barriers. The Journal for Nurse Practitioners, 17(2), 218–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nurpra.2020.09.013

24.

Gately

M. E.

Trudeau

S. A.

Moo

L. R.

(2020). Feasibility of telehealth-delivered home safety evaluations for caregivers of clients with dementia. OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 40(1), 42–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/1539449219859935

25.

Goldberg

E. M.

Lin

M. P.

Burke

L. G.

Jiménez

F. N.

Davoodi

N. M.

Merchant

R. C.

(2022). Perspectives on telehealth for older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic using the quadruple aim: Interviews with 48 physicians. BMC Geriatrics, 22(1), Article 188. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-022-02860-8

26.

Harris

P. A.

Taylor

Minor

B. L.

Elliott

Fernandez

O’Neal

McLeod

Delacqua

Kirby

Duda

S. N.

, & REDCap Consortium. (2019). The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 95, 103208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103208

27.

Hawley

C. E.

Genovese

Owsiany

M. T.

Triantafylidis

L. K.

Moo

L. R.

Linsky

A. M.

Sullivan

J. L.

Paik

J. M.

(2020). Rapid integration of home telehealth visits amidst COVID-19: What do older adults need to succeed? Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 68, 2431–2439. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.16845

28.

Hollander

J. E.

Davis

T. M.

Doarn

Goldwater

J. C.

Klasko

Lowery

Papanagnou

Rasmussen

Sites

F. D.

Stone

Carr

B. G.

(2018). Recommendations from the First National Academic Consortium of Telehealth. Population Health Management, 21(4), 271–277. https://doi.org/10.1089/pop.2017.0080

29.

Kalicki

A. V.

Moody

K. A.

Franzosa

Gliatto

P. M.

Ornstein

K. A.

(2021). Barriers to telehealth access among homebound older adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 69(9), 2404–2411. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.17163

30.

Little

L. M.

Pope

Wallisch

Dunn

(2018). Occupation-based coaching by means of telehealth for families of young children with autism spectrum disorder. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 72(2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2018.024786

31.

Little

L. M.

Wallisch

Pope

Dunn

(2018). Acceptability and cost comparison of a telehealth intervention for families of children with autism. Infants & Young Children, 31(4), 275–286. https://doi.org/10.1097/IYC.0000000000000126

32.

Little

L. M.

Pickett

K. A.

Proffitt

Cason

. (2021). Keeping pace with 21st century healthcare: A framework for telehealth research, practice, and program evaluation in occupational therapy. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 13(1), e6379. https://doi.org/10.5195/ijt.2021.6379

33.

Nundy

Cooper

L. A.

Mate

K. S.

(2022). The Quintuple Aim for health care improvement: A new imperative to advance health equity. JAMA, 327(6), 521–522. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.25181

34.

Papanagnou

Shoshana

Hollander

(2015). Training the next generation of care providers: Focus on telehealth. Healthcare Transformation, 1(1), 52–63. http://doi.org/10.1089/heat.2015.29001-psh

35.

Peckham

Pituch

K. A.

Maxfield

Guest

M. A.

Sivanandam

Doebbeling

B. N.

(2021). Aging through the time of COVID-19: A survey of self-reported healthcare access. BMC Health Services Research, 21(1), Article 1355. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07353-9

36.

Perrin

Atske

(2021, April 2). 7% of Americans don’t use the internet. Who are they? Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/04/02/7-of-americans-dont-use-the-internet-who-are-they/

37.

Proffitt

Cason

Little

Pickett

K. A.

(2021). Stimulating research to advance evidence-based applications of telehealth in occupational therapy. OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 41(3), 153–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/15394492211011433

38.

Qin

(2022). Technology learning and the adoption of telehealth among community-dwelling older adults during the COVID-19 outbreak. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 41(7), 1651–1656. https://doi.org/10.1177/07334648221085473

39.

Saragih

I. D.

Tonapa

S. I.

Osingada

C. P.

Porta

C. M.

Lee

(2022). Effects of telehealth-assisted interventions among people living with HIV/AIDS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X211070726

40.

Scott

A. M.

Bakhit

Greenwood

Cardona

Clark

Krzyzaniak

Peiris

Glasziou

(2022). Real-time telehealth versus face-to-face management for patients with PTSD in primary care: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 83(4), 21r14143. https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.21r14143

41.

Smith

S. J.

Smith

A. B.

Kennett

Vinod

S. K.

(2022). Exploring cancer patients’, caregivers’, and clinicians’ utilization and experiences of telehealth services during COVID-19: A qualitative study. Patient Education and Counseling, 105(10), 3134–3142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2022.06.001

42.

Taylor

Little

. (2023). Assessing clients’ perceived telehealth competency: Development of the Telehealth Competency Questionnaire – Consumer [Manuscript submitted for publication]. Department of Occupational Therapy, Rush University.

43.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2010, September). Part 7: Using readability formulas: A cautionary note. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. https://www.cms.gov/Outreach-and-Education/Outreach/WrittenMaterialsToolkit/Downloads/ToolkitPart07.pdf

44.

Vaportzis

Clausen

M. G.

Gow

A. J.

(2017). Older adults’ perceptions of technology and barriers to interacting with tablet computers: A focus group study. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 1687. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01687

45.

World Health Organization. (2022, October 4). Aging and health. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ageing-and-health

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.01 MB