Telemedicine and physicians’ work–life integration: a scoping review of benefits, risks, and organizational conditions

Work–life integration is central to physician well-being, workforce retention, and sustainable healthcare delivery. Telemedicine may increase flexibility and autonomy but can also extend clinical work beyond scheduled hours and blur work–life boundaries. We conducted a scoping review to examine how telemedicine relates to physicians’ work–life integration and the organizational conditions associated with these reported experiences. This scoping review followed Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews. PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched from inception to 16 June 2026, supplemented by citation searching. We included peer-reviewed empirical studies and implementation reports of physician-delivered or physician-involved telemedicine that reported physician work–life integration-related outcomes or clearly described physician-relevant work-design or organizational conditions. Two reviewers independently screened records and extracted data. Study characteristics were summarized descriptively, and findings were synthesized narratively. Twenty-nine studies published from 2015 to 2026 were included. The evidence base was heterogeneous across settings, specialties, telemedicine modalities, study designs, and outcome measures. Few studies assessed work–life integration as a standardized construct; most examined related domains, including workload, after-hours work, boundary management, flexibility, autonomy, burnout, well-being, job satisfaction, and retention intention. Reported benefits included greater flexibility, fewer location constraints, and greater control over time, particularly when remote care was formally scheduled and substituted for part of in-person work. Reported risks included hidden digital work, after-hours electronic health record use, asynchronous messaging burden, clinical uncertainty, responsibility transfer, and reduced team connection. Reported patterns varied across studies according to whether remote care was scheduled, recognized in workload accounting, supported by patient triage, escalation pathways, technology infrastructure, team support, compensation arrangements, and after-hours policies. Telemedicine should not be assumed to improve physicians’ work–life integration. Reported work–life experiences varied according to whether remote care was formally scheduled, recognized within workload, supported, and clearly bounded. Health service organizations should therefore consider evaluating telemedicine not only in terms of access and efficiency, but also in relation to physician well-being, job satisfaction, team functioning, and workforce sustainability. Open Science Framework, registration f4tv8.