Video versus telephone for telehealth delivery: a cross-sectional study of Australian general practice trainees

Background Remunerated telehealth consultations were introduced in Australia in 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Videoconferencing has advantages over telephone-consulting, including improved diagnostic and decision-making accuracy. However, videoconferencing uptake in Australia has been low. This study aimed to establish prevalence and associations of video versus telephone consultations in Australian general practice (GP) registrars' practice.Methods A cross-sectional analysis of data from 2020 to 2021 (three 6-monthly data-collection rounds) from the Registrars Clinical Encounters in Training (ReCEnT) study. GP registrars record details of 60 consecutive consultations every 6-month term, for a total of 3 terms. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were performed within the Generalized Estimating Equations framework with the outcome video versus telephone.Results 102,286 consultations were recorded by 1,168 registrars, with 21.4% of consultations performed via telehealth. Of these, telephone accounted for 96.6% (95% CI: 96.3-96.8%) and videoconferencing for 3.4% (95% CI: 3.2-3.7%). Statistically significant associations of using videoconferencing, compared to telephone, included longer consultation duration (OR 1.02, 95% CI: 1.01-1.03 per minute; and mean 14.9 versus 12.8 min), patients aged 0-14 years old (OR 1.29, 95% CI: 1.03-1.62, compared to age 15-34), patients new to the registrar (OR 1.19, 95% CI: 1.04-1.35), part-time registrars (OR 1.84, 95% CI: 1.08-3.15), and areas of less socioeconomic disadvantage (OR 1.27, 95% CI: 1.00-1.62 per decile).Conclusions Registrars' telehealth consultations were mostly performed via telephone. Telephone use being associated with socioeconomic disadvantage has health equity implications. Future research should explore barriers to videoconferencing use and strategies to increase its uptake.