Protecting the public interest while regulating health professionals providing virtual care: A scoping review

Author:

Leslie KathleenORCID,Myles Sophia,Schiller Catharine J.,Alraja Abeer,Nelson Sioban,Adams Tracey L

Abstract

AbstractTechnology is transforming service delivery in many health professions, particularly with the rapid shift to virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Health profession regulators must navigate legal and ethical complexities to facilitate virtual care while upholding their mandate to protect the public interest. The objectives of this scoping review were to examine how the public interest is protected when regulating health professionals who provide virtual care, discuss policy and practice implications of virtual care, and make recommendations for future research.We searched six multidisciplinary databases for academic literature published in English between January 2015 and May 2021. We also searched specific databases and websites for relevant grey literature. Sources were screened in duplicate against specified inclusion criteria. Fifty-nine academic articles and 18 grey literature sources were included. Data from included sources were extracted and descriptively synthesized.We identified five key findings. Most literature did not explicitly focus on the public interest aspects of regulating health professionals who provide virtual care. However, when the public interest was discussed, the dimension of access was emphasized. Criticism in the literature focused on social ideologies driving regulation that may inhibit more widespread use of virtual care, and subnational occupational licensure was viewed as a barrier. The demand for virtual care during COVID-19 catalyzed licensure and scope of practice changes.Virtual care introduces new areas of risk, potential harm, and inequity that health profession regulators need to address as technology continues to evolve. Regulators have an essential role in providing clear standards and guidelines around virtual care, including what is required for competent practice. There are indications that the public interest concept is evolving in relation to virtual care as regulators continue to balance public safety, equitable access to services, and economic competitiveness.Non-Technical SummaryTechnology is transforming how many health professionals provide services, particularly with the rapid shift to virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many of these health professionals are accountable to a regulator that sets standards of practice, including for virtual care. These regulators have a mandate to protect the public. We conducted a review to determine whether there was existing evidence or literature about how these regulators were working to protect patients when health professionals were providing virtual care. Most of the literature we found did not explicitly focus on the public interest when discussing how to regulate health professionals who provide virtual care. However, when the public interest was discussed, access to care was emphasized. Criticism in the literature focused on social ideologies driving regulation that may inhibit more widespread use of virtual care, especially as the demand for virtual care during COVID-19 catalyzed regulatory changes. Virtual care introduces new areas of risk, potential harm, and inequity that regulators need to address as technology continues to evolve. Regulators have an essential role in providing clear standards and guidelines around virtual care, including what is required for health professionals to be competent.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3