Telehealth as gatekeeper: policy implications for geography and scope of services.

Why, despite enthusiasm, is telehealth still a relatively minor part of healthcare delivery in many health systems? We examined two less-considered policy issues: (1) the scope of services being offered by telehealth and how this matches existing arrangements for insured services; and (2) how the ability of telehealth services to minimize barriers associated with geography is dealt with in a system organized and financed on geographical boundaries. Fifty-three semistructured interviews with key stakeholders involved in the management of 43 Canadian telehealth programs were conducted. In addition, quantitative activity data were analyzed from 33 telehealth programs. Two telehealth approaches emerged: telephone-based (N = 3), and video-conferencing-based (N = 40). Most programs reflected, rather than superceded, existing geographical boundaries; with the technology being used, the videoconferencing models imposed significant barriers to unfettered access by outlying communities because they required sites to acquire expensive technology, be affiliated with an existing telehealth network, and schedule visits in advance. In consequence, much activity was administrative and educational, rather than clinical, and often extended beyond the set of mandatory insured services. Despite high hopes that telehealth would improve access to care for rural/remote areas, gatekeeping inherent in certain telehealth systems imposes barriers to unfettered use by rural/remote areas, although it does facilitate other valued activities. Policy approaches are needed to promote a closer match between the expectations for telehealth and the realities reflected by many existing models.