148
JCPSLP
Volume 16, Number 3 2014
Journal of Clinical Practice in Speech-Language Pathology
transcribed and coded using the following steps (as per
Liamputtong, 2010):
Step 1: Open coding: initial sorting of keywords and
phrases from each transcription into as many codes as
possible, identifying key points relevant to the research
questions.
Step 2: Focused coding: sorting codes into subthemes
searching for similarities and differences and making sense
of patterns within the subthemes.
Step 3: Axial coding: Reviewing subthemes and
comparing back to original transcripts for accuracy. Codes
and subthemes were re-worked for consistency and
accuracy.
Step 4: Selective coding: Final refining of themes
and subthemes and applying definitions and labels to
overarching core themes.
Credibility
Transcripts were analysed by both researchers
independently to increase the validity of the emerging
nationally via the SPA national e-newsletter (June and July
2013) where an information statement and an invitation to
contact the primary researcher were provided. The chief
allied health advisor from a state government health service
facilitated an invitation to SLP heads of department and
clinical lead SLPs to convene focus groups with the primary
researcher at their locations. The combined use of individual
interviews and focus groups ensured adequate participant
numbers. Previous studies involving SLPs as participants
have reported difficulty with participant recruitment (Dunkley
et al., 2010; Hill & Miller, 2012). Participants could attend
either a focus group or an interview depending on their
availability and location.
Twelve SLPs participated in individual interviews (two
face to face [FTF] and 10 via telephone) and six participated
in one of two focus groups (one with four participants and
one with two participants). Focus groups were conducted
via teleconference as participants were more than 100
kilometres from the researcher.
Data collection
Interviews and focus groups used semi-structured
open-ended questions in order to elicit in-depth
understandings and beliefs about telehealth (Liamputtong,
2010). A topic guide, based on Hill and Miller’s (2012)
questionnaire, was used to explore participant perceptions
of telehealth use in SLP (Table 2). Interviews (average
length, 29 minutes) and focus groups (average length, 47
minutes) occurred over a period of three months. All
interviews and focus groups were recorded with a digital
audio-recording device and telephone microphone and the
researcher kept written notes. Data were fully transcribed
verbatim by the first author.
Data analysis
Thematic analysis using a grounded theory approach was
used to analyse the data (Table 3). Transcription occurred
immediately after each interview and focus group.
Transcribed data informed questions presented in
subsequent interviews and focus groups. All data were fully
Table 1: Demographic Data
Name*
Age range
Years in profession
State
Geographic location
Clinical context
Caseload
Sarah
26–35
5–10
SA
RR
Acute Hosp/CH
Mixed
Sandra
36–45
> 15
SA
RR
CH
Mixed
Alison
36–45
> 15
SA
RR
CH
Mixed
Taylor
26–35
< 5
SA
RR
Rehab
Adult
Melody
36–45
> 15
VIC
Outer metro
Disability
Mixed
Kerry
26–35
5–10
VIC
Inner metro
Acute Hosp.
Adult
Trudy
26–35
11–15
VIC
Inner metro
Acute Hosp.
Adult
Rhonda
36–45
> 15
SA
RR
Acute/Rehab
Adult
Rosa
36–45
> 15
SA
Outer metro
CH
Paediatric
Jacinta
26–35
11–15
QLD
RR
PP
Paediatric
Hayley
36–45
> 15
SA
RR
CH
Mixed
Yvonne
46–55
> 15
SA
Outer metro
CH/PP
Paediatric
Maria
26–35
5–10
VIC
Outer metro
Disability
Paediatric
Leila
26–35
5–10
VIC
Inner metro
Disability
Adult
Lucy
36–45
> 15
SA
Inner metro
CH
Paediatric
Fiona
36–45
> 15
SA
Inner metro
CH
Paediatric
Susan
Over 55
> 15
VIC
RR
Disability
Adult
Kelly
36–45
> 15
NSW
Inner metro
Private rehab
Adult
Notes. RR: Rural & remote; CH: Community health; PP: Private practice; NSW: New South Wales; SA: South Australia; QLD: Queensland; VIC: Victoria;
Inner metro: within 20km of a CBD; Outer metro: 21–50km of CBD; Rural & remote (RR): more than 50km from CBD. * The names of the SLPs are
pseudonyms.
Table 2. Topic guide
The areas included in the topic guide were:
1. Introduction
Participant demographics
What do you think of when you hear the term telehealth?
What do think about telehealth in speech pathology for clinical
service provision?
2. Exploring the barriers to using telehealth?
Why don’t you use it?
Any further barriers?
3. Potential facilitators to using telehealth.
What would need to be different for you to use telehealth?
What do you believe would support uptake of telehealth in speech
pathology?
