Ethical assessment of virtual consultation services: scoping review and development of a practical ethical checklist
Madeleine Reid 1 , Tania Moerenhout
2 *
1
2
Abstract
The use of telephone and video consultations has vastly increased since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Health care providers in traditional clinical practices have embraced these virtual consultations as an alternative to face-to-face consultations, but there has also been a simultaneous increase in services offered directly to consumers via commercial entities. One of the main challenges in telemedicine (and the broader field of digital health) is how to conduct a meaningful ethical assessment of such services.
This article presents a novel framework for practical ethical analysis of direct-to-consumer virtual general practitioner consultation services in Aotearoa New Zealand.
First, a scoping review of academic and policy documents identified the core ethical challenges arising from virtual consultations. Second, a qualitative analysis was conducted to translate the main ethical themes and subthemes into practical questions to assess virtual general practice services.
A total of 49 relevant documents were selected for review. The six key ethical themes related to telemedicine were: privacy, security, and confidentiality; equity; autonomy and informed consent; quality and standards of care; patient empowerment; and continuity of care. A practical ethical checklist consisting of 25 questions was developed from these themes and their subthemes.
The checklist provides an accessible way of incorporating ethics into technology assessment and can be used by all relevant stakeholders, including patients, health care providers, and developers. Application of the framework contributes to improving the quality of virtual consultation services with a specific focus on ethics.
Keywords: clinical ethics, digital health ethics, direct-to-consumer, ethical technology assessment, scoping review, telemedicine, telehealth, video consultations, virtual consultation services.
References
1 World Health Organization. Global strategy on digital health 2020-2025. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021. https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/documents/gs4dhdaa2a9f352b0445bafbc79ca799dce4d.pdf
2 Cheng A, Guzman CEV, Duffield TC, et al. Advancing telemedicine within family medicine’s core values. Telemed J E Health 2021; 27(2): 121-3.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
3 The Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners. Position statement: specialist GP telehealth consultations. Wellington; 2022. https://www.rnzcgp.org.nz/resources/telehealth-resources/specialist-gp-telehealth-consultations-position-statement/
4 Medical Council of New Zealand. Statement on Telehealth. 2023. https://www.mcnz.org.nz/our-standards/current-standards/telehealth/
5 World Health Organization. Health technology assessment. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2023. https://www.who.int/health-topics/health-technology-assessment#tab=tab_1
6 Lehoux P, Blume S. Technology assessment and the sociopolitics of health technologies. J Health Polit Policy Law 2000; 25(6): 1083-120.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
7 Refolo P, Sacchini D, Brereton L, et al. Why is it so difficult to integrate ethics in Health Technology Assessment (HTA)? The epistemological viewpoint. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2016; 20(20): 4202-8.
| Google Scholar | PubMed |
8 Hofmann B. Why not integrate ethics in HTA: identification and assessment of the reasons. GMS Health Technol Assess 2014; 10: Doc04.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
9 Palm E, Hansson SO. The case for ethical technology assessment (eTA). Technol Forecast Soc Change 2006; 73(5): 543-58.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
10 Vandemeulebroucke T, Denier Y, Mertens E, et al. Which framework to use? A systematic review of ethical frameworks for the screening or evaluation of health technology innovations. Sci Eng Ethics 2022; 28(3): 26.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
11 Jobin A, Ienca M, Vayena E. The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nat Mach Intell 2019; 1: 389-99.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
12 Ienca M. Don’t pause giant AI for the wrong reasons. Nat Mach Intell 2023; 5(5): 470-1.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
13 The Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners. The Foundation Standard. Wellington; 2024. Available at https://www.rnzcgp.org.nz/running-a-practice/the-foundation-standard/ [cited 29 May 2024].
14 Peters MDJ, Marnie C, Tricco AC, et al. Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evid Synth 2020; 18(10): 2119-26.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
15 Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med 2018; 169(7): 467-73.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
16 Sheridan NF, Kenealy TW, Connolly MJ, et al. Health equity in the New Zealand health care system: a national survey. Int J Equity Health 2011; 10(1): 45.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
17 Reid P, Paine SJ, Te Ao B, et al. Estimating the economic costs of Indigenous health inequities in New Zealand: a retrospective cohort analysis. BMJ Open 2022; 12(10): e065430.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
18 Aneja J, Arora S. Telemedicine and ethics: opportunities in India. Indian J Med Ethics 2021; VI(4): 314-20.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
19 Cordeiro JV. Digital technologies and data science as health enablers: an outline of appealing promises and compelling ethical, legal, and social challenges. Front Med 2021; 8: 647897.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
20 Intan Sabrina M, Defi IR. Telemedicine guidelines in South East Asia—A scoping review. Front Neurol 2021; 11: 581649.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
21 Jokinen A, Stolt M, Suhonen R. Ethical issues related to eHealth: an integrative review. Nurs Ethics 2021; 28(2): 253-71.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
22 Kaplan B. Revisiting health information technology ethical, legal, and social issues and evaluation: telehealth/telemedicine and COVID-19. Int J Med Inform 2020; 143: 104239.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
23 Kaplan B. Ethics, guidelines, standards, and policy: telemedicine, COVID-19, and broadening the ethical scope. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2022; 31(1): 105-18.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
24 Langarizadeh M, Moghbeli F, Aliabadi A. Application of ethics for providing telemedicine services and information technology. Med Arch 2017; 71(5): 351-5.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
25 Lee DWH, Tong K-W, Lai PBS. Telehealth practice in surgery: ethical and medico-legal considerations. Surg Pract 2021; 25(1): 42-6.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
26 Melchiorre MG, Lamura G, Barbabella F. EHealth for people with multimorbidity: Results from the ICARE4EU project and insights from the “10 e’s” by Gunther Eysenbach. PLoS One 2018; 13(11): e0207292.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
27 Tedeschi C. Ethical, legal, and social challenges in the development and implementation of disaster telemedicine. Disaster Med Public Health Prep 2021; 15(5): 649-56.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
28 Umali MJPS, Evangelista-Sanchez AMA, Lu JL, et al. Elaborating and discoursing the ethics in ehealth in the philippines: recommendations for health care practice and research. Acta Med Philipp 2016; 50(4): 215-22.
| Google Scholar |
29 Xu J, Willging A, Bramstedt KA. A scoping review of the ethical issues within telemedicine: lessons from COVID-19 pandemic. J Health Soc Sci 2021; 6(1): 31-40.
| Google Scholar |
30 NZ Telehealth Forum and Resource Centre. Guideline for establishing & maintaining sustainable Telemedicine services in New Zealand. Christchurch; 2017. https://www.telehealth.org.nz/assets/Uploads/180913-Telemedicine-Guideline-for-NZTRC.pdf
31 Cahan EM, Mittal V, Shah NR, et al. Achieving a quintuple aim for telehealth in pediatrics. Pediatr Clin North Am 2020; 67(4): 683-705.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
32 Qureshi AZ, Ullah S, Aldajani AA, et al. Telerehabilitation guidelines in Saudi Arabia. Telemed J E Health 2021; 27(10): 1087-98.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
33 Scott TM, Marton KM, Madore MR. A detailed analysis of ethical considerations for three specific models of teleneuropsychology during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. Clin Neuropsychol 2022; 36(1): 24-44.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
34 Budhwani S, Fujioka J, Thomas-Jacques T, et al. Challenges and strategies for promoting health equity in virtual care: findings and policy directions from a scoping review of reviews. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2022; 29(5): 990-9.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
35 Grebenshchikova E. Digital medicine: bioethical assessment of challenges and opportunities. JAHR 2019; 10(1): 211-23.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
36 Holt GR. Contemporary ethical considerations in clinical otolaryngology. Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol 2020; 5(4): 778-81.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
37 Lindeman DA, Kim KK, Gladstone C, et al. Technology and caregiving: emerging interventions and directions for research. Gerontologist 2020; 60(Supplement 1): S41-9.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
38 Qian AS, Schiaffino MK, Nalawade V, et al. Disparities in telemedicine during COVID-19. Cancer Med 2022; 11(4): 1192-201.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
39 Rodriguez JA, Shachar C, Bates DW. Digital inclusion as Health Care - Supporting Health Care Equity with digital-infrastructure initiatives. N Engl J Med 2022; 386(12): 1101-3.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
40 Shaw J, Brewer LC, Veinot T. Recommendations for health equity and virtual care arising from the COVID-19 pandemic: narrative review. JMIR Form Res 2021; 5(4): e23233.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
41 Simon DA, Shachar C. Telehealth to address health sisparities: potential, pitfalls, and paths ahead. J Law Med Ethics 2021; 49(3): 415-7.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
42 Solimini R, Busardò FP, Gibelli F, et al. Ethical and legal challenges of telemedicine in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic. Medicina 2021; 57(12): 1314.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
43 Chaet D, Clearfield R, Sabin JE, et al. Ethical practice in telehealth and telemedicine. J Gen Intern Med 2017; 32(10): 1136-40.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
44 Baumes A, Čolić M, Araiba S. Comparison of telehealth-related ethics and guidelines and a checklist for ethical decision making in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. Behav Anal Pract 2020; 13(4): 736-47.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
45 Guy M, Blary A, Ladner J, et al. Ethical issues linked to the development of telerehabilitation: a qualitative study. Int J Telerehabil 2021; 13(1): e6367.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
46 Iyengar K, Jain VK, Vaishya R. Pitfalls in telemedicine consultations in the era of COVID 19 and how to avoid them. Diabetes Metab Syndr 2020; 14(5): 797-9.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
47 Rabe M. Telehealth in South Africa: a guide for healthcare practitioners in primary care. S Afr Fam Pract 2022; 64(1): a5533.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
48 Raveesh BN, Munoli RN. Ethical and legal aspects of telepsychiatry. Indian J Psychol Med 2020; 42(5_suppl): 63S-9S.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
49 Shafizadeh H, Larijani B, Mojtahedzadeh R, et al. Initial drafting of telemedicine’s code of ethics through a stakeholders’ participatory process. J Med Ethics Hist Med 2021; 14: 24.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
50 Townsend BA, Scott RE, Mars M. The development of ethical guidelines for telemedicine in South Africa. S Afr J Bioeth Law 2019; 12(1): 19-26.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
51 Louw PK. ACC Telehealth Guide. Wellington: Accident Compensation Corporation; 2022. https://www.acc.co.nz/assets/provider/acc8331-telehealth-guide.pdf
52 Parsons JA. The telemedical imperative. Bioethics 2021; 35(4): 298-306.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
53 Fiene SL, Stark KS, Kreiner DS, et al. Evaluating telehealth websites for information consistent with APA guidelines for telepsychology. J Technol Hum Serv 2020; 38(2): 91-111.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
54 Greenhalgh T, Rosen R, Shaw SE, et al. Planning and evaluating remote consultation services: a new conceptual framework incorporating complexity and practical ethics. Front Digit Health 2021; 3: 726095.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
55 Kuziemsky CE, Hunter I, Gogia SB, et al. Ethics in telehealth: comparison between Guidelines and Practice-based Experience – the case for learning health systems. Yearb Med Inform 2020; 29(1): 44-50.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
56 Heintz E, Lintamo L, Hultcrantz M, et al. Framework for systematic identification of ethical aspects of healthcare technologies: the SBU approach. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2015; 31(3): 124-30.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
57 Assasi N, Tarride JE, O’Reilly D, et al. Steps toward improving ethical evaluation in health technology assessment: a proposed framework. BMC Med Ethics 2016; 17(1): 34.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
