Publication: Exploring the Feasibility of Implementing Telepractice Innovation for Speech-Language Pathologists in Thailand
4
Issued Date
2024
Resource Type
Resource Version
Accepted Manuscript
Language
eng
File Type
application/pdf
ISSN
0125-3611 (Print)
2651-0561 (Online)
2651-0561 (Online)
Journal Title
Ramathibodi Medical Journal
Volume
47
Issue
1
Start Page
32
End Page
46
Access Rights
open access
Rights
ผลงานนี้เป็นลิขสิทธิ์ของมหาวิทยาลัยมหิดล ขอสงวนไว้สำหรับเพื่อการศึกษาเท่านั้น ต้องอ้างอิงแหล่งที่มา ห้ามดัดแปลงเนื้อหา และห้ามนำไปใช้เพื่อการค้า
Rights Holder(s)
Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital Mahidol University
Bibliographic Citation
Ramathibodi Medical Journal. Vol. 47, No. 1 (Jan - Mar 2024), 32-46
Suggested Citation
Tipwaree Aueworakhunanan, Pitcharpa Dejket, Sudarat Phakkachok, Weerapat Punkla Exploring the Feasibility of Implementing Telepractice Innovation for Speech-Language Pathologists in Thailand. Ramathibodi Medical Journal. Vol. 47, No. 1 (Jan - Mar 2024), 32-46. 46. Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/109824
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Exploring the Feasibility of Implementing Telepractice Innovation for Speech-Language Pathologists in Thailand
Abstract
Background: The speech clinic at Ramathibodi Hospital has been using telepractice for 2 years. These outcomes have clearly shown many benefits. It is a new system in Thailand that has not been studied in terms of innovation before.
Objective: To explore the possibility of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) in Thailand implementing the telepractice innovation through a survey of their attitudes toward the characteristics, diffusion, and limitations of innovation.
Methods: In this survey study, SLPs responded to a questionnaire. Data regarding SLPs’ attitudes toward telepractice innovation were collected and then analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.
Results: A total of 86 SLPs responded, who agreed characteristics, diffusion, and both were 54.66%, 45.34%, and 37.21%, respectively, most of them used telepractice. SLPs who used telepractice expressed limitations from patients at 52.24% and SLPs who did not use telepractice expressed limitations from systems at 47.36%.
Conclusions: SLPs in Thailand equally expressed attitudes of agreement and disagreement toward the characteristics and diffusion of telepractice innovation. However, SLPs who used telepractice agreed more than those who did not. SLPs agreed on the characteristic of telepractice innovation, though not all of them agreed to the diffusion of telepractice. The limitations of telepractice innovation depended on SLPs’ telepractice experience, occurring from patients for SLPs who used telepractice, but from the system for SLPs who did not. Therefore, telepractice may be an option that can be used according to the needs of the patients and its appropriateness for specific situations.