Introduction

Research is increasing on asynchronous technologies used by specialist clinicians and primary care, including e-mail, text, e-consultation, and store-and-forward (asynchronous) options. Studies typically describe interventions and care outcomes rather than development of clinical skills for using technology.

Methods

This article attempts to compare clinicians' approaches to, and skills for, asynchronous technologies versus in-person and synchronous (i.e., video) care. Literature from technology, health care, pedagogy, and business were searched from 2000 to 2019 for title words, including synchronous (e.g., video, telemental or behavioral health, telepsychiatry), asynchronous (e.g., app, e-consultation, e-mail, text, sensor in a wearable device), education, clinical, and consultation.

Results

From a total of 4,812 potential references, two authors (D.M.H., J.T.) found 4,622 eligible for full text review and found 381 articles directly relevant to the concept areas in combination for full text review. However, exclusion criteria subtracted 305, leaving a total of 76 articles. While in-person and synchronous care are similar in many ways, the clinical approach to asynchronous care has many differences. As asynchronous technologies and models of care are feasible and effective, often for consultation, an outline of patient, primary care provider, and specialist clinician goals and skills are presented. Few studies specifically discuss skills or competencies for asynchronous care, but components from published clinical informatics, video, social media, and mobile health competencies were organized into Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education domains. Conclusions: Further implementation of science research is needed for asynchronous technology interventions, as well as clinician competencies using asynchronous technologies, to ensure optimal outcomes for patients in health care.

Keywords: e-Health; education; mHealth; telehealth; telemedicine; telepsychiatry.