Dietitian reflections on video consultations: a descriptive qualitative study

Abstract Background A transition is seen in healthcare from routine face-to-face consultations to increased reliance on video consultations. Practice by healthcare professionals, who serve extensive geographical areas and conduct relatively few physical examinations, may particularly benefit from this modality. While video consultations attract political interest by offering practical advantages—such as reduced travel—healthcare professionals remain responsible for maintaining care quality. Thus, it is essential to examine how healthcare professionals, such as registered dietitians, reason about the use of video consultations to better support informed decisions about the use of video consultations in healthcare practice. Methods Data were collected using digital interviews from nine registered dietitians selected using purposeful, convenience, and snowball sampling. The data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis, guided by a patient-centred framework for access to healthcare that considers both patient and provider perspectives. Results Dietitians reported that video consultations enhanced flexibility and access to healthcare, though not universally for all patients or stages of care. Three themes emerged: Contributing to good and accessible healthcare ; Gaining control over one’s working situation ; and Keeping the care process in mind . Dietitians selected video consultations based on considerations of equity and effectiveness but preferred face-to-face consultations when physical assessments were necessary, or when patients lacked adequate digital skills. This was interpreted as personal preferences and normative responses to organizational structures, and policy frameworks. Conclusion When multiple aspects of care delivery are considered simultaneously, perceived benefits may overshadow limitations, and vice versa. Future research should explore how to support healthcare professionals in involving patients and navigating competing policy frameworks, professional responsibilities, and contextual demands when deciding on consultation modalities.