Telehealth provider publishes ‘best-practice’ principles
14 May 2025
Eucalyptus says an ‘absence of regulation’ prompted the move, while RACGP quality care experts say there is insufficient information about their scope and sources.
With the rise of telehealth showing no sign of slowing down, and multiple start-ups offering online consults, consistent standards are necessary to regulate and ensure best practice and patient safety.
Now, a major player in the telehealth industry has released its own set of best practice principles – but are there risks that come with an industry regulating itself?
This week, Eucalyptus published its ‘Telehealth best practice principles for Australian online providers’, aiming to deliver a ‘nationally recognised set of safety and quality guidelines’ for Australian companies operating online-only telehealth services.
In a social media post, Eucalyptus founder Tim Doyle said the difference between good and bad telehealth ‘comes down to the clinical governance standards our industry holds itself to’.
‘At the moment, those are incredibly inconsistent,’ he said. ‘Without clear answers, quality depends entirely on who’s running the service. That’s not good enough – at Eucalyptus, we’ve had to build our own.
‘We want this to be a conversation starter on the path to an industry-wide code of conduct, ideally as part of a self-regulatory body.’
Eucalyptus says it has an ‘extremely serious’ commitment to patient safety, but Chair of the RACGP Expert Committee – Quality Care (REC–QC), Professor Mark Morgan, has concerns about this recent move.
‘There is insufficient information about how Eucalyptus has decided what is the scope of their standards and what sources have been used to get the standards right,’ he told newsGP.
‘It is unclear whether an industry provider of telehealth should lead this self-declared national telehealth standards or whether it would be more appropriate for an independent organisation to lead the work with input from experienced providers.’
Eucalyptus says its best practice principles may also be a guidance for ‘bricks-and-mortar health clinics’ providing telehealth consultations as an adjunct to in-person care. Intended as a proposal to ‘support a discussion about industry-wide standards’, the document covers:
- clinical safety, quality and governance
- practitioner oversight and credentialing
- quality care, including continuity of care and patient outcomes
- data protection and security.
However, the Medical Board already has guidelines for telehealth consultations with patients, with a key aim to regulate telehealth start-ups offering prescriptions without a real-time consultation with a doctor.
The Board is also working with the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care on virtual care standards.
Additionally, the RACGP has telehealth resources to guide GPs on how to safely and effectively deliver telehealth services, including appropriate principles for conducting telehealth consultations.
GP and Clinical Director at Eucalyptus, Dr Matt Vickers, told newsGP the reasoning behind the release.
‘AHPRA provides guidance for individual clinicians, whereas this document relates to governance at the clinic level, for which there are no existing standards in Australia for virtual care,’ he said.
When asked if he sees any potential risks to patient safety with an industry regulating itself, Dr Vickers said ‘the current position is an absence of regulation in this area’.
‘Industry self-regulation would therefore be a step in the right direction, unless or until the Government regulates the sector,’ he said.
The college has previously warned of the risk of disconnecting patients from their regular GP with access to free telehealth consults. Questions were also previously raised around weight loss medicines prescribed online.
Professor Morgan says the RACGP is concerned about the negative consequences of telehealth-only providers fragmenting care or substituting convenience over quality.
‘Standards should ideally support high-quality, patient-centred, fit-for-purpose care that can maximise health benefits,’ he said.
The release of the principles come amid a changing landscape for telehealth in Australia, which continues to remain popular with patients following a COVID-19-induced boom.
Around 19.7% of people have a telehealth consultation with a GP each year, with most patients reporting a positive experience.
Dr Michael Tam, who also sits on the REC–QC, told newsGP that Eucalyptus has developed ‘generally good principles’ that add to existing knowledge, but agrees they lack the details required to inform levels of implementation and action.
‘Individual clinicians, clinical services, and the health industry do have a responsibility and duty to ensure good medical practice and a commitment to health quality and safety,’ he said.
‘There are various mechanisms for this, including local governance arrangements, broader professional codes of conduct, clinical guidelines, as well as defined standards for the purposes of accreditation.
‘Robust self-regulation is an important part of the endeavour, but probably insufficient to be relied upon alone.
‘The development of appropriate industry standards will necessarily require input from industry as a stakeholder, so I imagine that Eucalyptus’ recent document on principles will contribute to the discussion.’