I believe that Balogun et al. (2025) described the presence of telehealth in a way that aligned with my expectations. After COVID, the popularity and demand for telehealth services have grown. I also feel that we are seeing telehealth become a bit more normalized in social work and other healthcare professions. One thing that surprised me was the authors’ brief discussion regarding the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in telehealth. Because clients and professionals are not in person, I wonder if this would only further emphasize the difference between in-person and virtual visits.
I agreed with the discussion around the benefits of telehealth for vulnerable populations. The authors highlighted how telehealth can help address barriers such as transportation, accessibility, location, safety, and stigma. Telehealth can be an important tool for clients who face challenges with receiving consistent in-person services.
Resource connection, interdisciplinary collaboration, and advocacy are telehealth uses that I believe should have been included. This article focuses on direct service delivery, but I believe it would have been beneficial also to include that telehealth can be an excellent way to educate clients and help them access resources. In addition, telehealth allows social workers to coordinate care and collaborate with other healthcare professionals.
Telehealth presents challenges, but I feel that the most significant is the digital divide. This is the most significant challenge because it is essentially a foundational concern. The digital divide often directly impacts vulnerable populations, for whom telehealth is extremely important. Given the digital divide, telehealth offers expanded access and resources, but it can only be effective if clients actually have the capabilities and means to use it.
In the Zhu et al. (2024) reading, I was surprised by practitioners’ level of comfort with public insurance programs such as Medicare and Medicaid during COVID-19. I expected practitioners to feel that self-pay insurance was more reliable, as I was unaware of the temporary policies in place during this time. Similarly, I was somewhat surprised by the expectations of practitioners serving clients in rural communities. They had a greater expectation to serve clients through telemedicine more frequently following the COVID-19 Pandemic. It is understandable why, when you consider the limited options and the difficulties in accessing care otherwise. I may have found this a bit surprising, however, due to the digital divide, as mentioned by Balogun et al. (2025), which can lead to gaps in care and subsequently participation.
As a result of the pandemic, I did expect elevated rates of telemental health utilization. The pandemic was an unprecedented experience for most, and I believe people struggled with the isolation, fear, and uncertainty. With in-person visits severely restricted or unavailable, it is understandable that clients sought assistance in other ways.
Two factors that affected whether a practitioner thought they’d continue offering telemedicine services were reimbursement methods and clients’ locations. As I mentioned earlier, practitioners who served clients with public insurance at that time considered it reliable. Still, as temporary allowances and policies were rolled back at the end of the pandemic, they began to question whether reimbursement would remain stable. Practitioners who served self-pay or out-of-pocket clients had a higher expectation of continuing their telemedicine services. Client location or geography was also a factor that practitioners considered. Those who served clients in rural areas expressed a willingness to use telemedicine to continue serving them, as they may have limited access to care without it.
Regarding my own practice, I have mixed feelings about offering telehealth services. I recognize and appreciate the benefits of telehealth, including expanded access and accessibility. On the other hand, I enjoy in-person interactions and worry about how nonverbal cues may translate in a virtual session. I would also have concerns about client data protection, wanting to ensure that I was utilizing tools that prioritized my clients’ personal information.
Balogun, Adeseun Kafayat, et al. “Integrating Telehealth Services in Social Work Practice for Vulnerable Groups.” World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, vol. 25, no. 1, Jan. 2025, pp. 1984–1991, https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2025.25.1.0248.
Zhu, Demi, et al. “Exploring Telemental Health Practice Before, During, and after the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, vol. 30, no. 1, 9 July 2021, p. 1357633X2110259, https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633×211025943.
Hello,
I thought it was interesting that you brought up the use of AI in telehealth, as I hadn’t really considered it while reading the article. The idea of the digital divide as a foundational challenge makes a lot of sense, since telehealth only works if clients have access to the technology needed to use it. I also found the discussion about practitioners serving rural communities interesting, as telemedicine can make services much more accessible to people who live far from providers. At the same time, I can understand that concerns about technological barriers could still limit participation for some clients. I also agree that reimbursement policies could influence whether providers continue offering telemedicine services in the future. It shows that while telehealth has many benefits, important challenges remain to be addressed.
Brianna,
Telehealth has become more normalized since the pandemic – but you will be surprised at the pace of AI integration as well. I’m not sure that AI intensifies the distinction between remote and inperson service delivery. The fear – and we will be discussing this over the next couple weeks – is that it could replace it and it’s not what is truly needed.
I would like to have heard more about what you learned about vulnerable populations from the article. I agree that it can be helpful for some clients, but it also raises serious concerns for others.
I too was surprised they didn’t talk about collaboration and resource referral in this review. I’m not sure if that just wasn’t discussed in the articles they reviewed, or if it is such an integral part of social work services that they assumed it. It’s a good question.
I think the issue of insurance goes well beyond Medicare and Medicaid. While these authors focused on that particular insurance provider, the landscape regarding telehealth has dramatically changed. Most insurance that provides mental health services will allow payment for telehealth sessions, and Medicare just released a statement affirming their continued payment for telehealth. The issues with insurance, as I read the article, continues no matter how you provide the services, right? The issue of availability in rural ares continues to be of concern, so most providers and insurers will find a way to continue telehealth services.
Good discussion. All of us wish for a hybrid model of practice. Seeing people matters. That’s why I ask for an introductory video.
Dr P