It has been almost 10 years since I was indoctrinated into the specialized field of telepractice. My introduction was based on a persistent need. At the time, as the director of a statewide early intervention program, I was committed to delivering the same high-quality early intervention services using the communication approach selected by each family to all children in the state irrespective of the geographic location in which the children lived. This presented a challenge as many rural communities did not have a provider with expertise in working with children who are deaf and hard of hearing (DHH). If there was a provider, the professional often had the knowledge and skills for only one communication approach. A logical way to meet these commitments was to deliver services by connecting children in rural areas with providers in distant, and often urban, areas. Little did I know that I was venturing into a field that was already of high interest in the medical community. In short order, I became aware that the field of rehabilitation, and speech-language pathology specifically, was investigating telepractice as a service delivery model.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Edwards et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: