You are a rural community health analyst. In your role, you are attempting to find an effective strategy to address the barriers to access of care for a rural community in your state. You have determined that telehealth may be a viable solution.
Research the impact of telehealth on access to healthcare in international markets.
Discuss the possible implications of telehealth on rural communities in the U.S.
Using the California-based clinic, La Clinica de la Raza, as a benchmark, evaluate the financial report of the organization and discuss the organization’s financial performance based on your findings from the report.
After a review of the financial data, create a business report in which you discuss the benefits of implementing telehealth.
Telehealth has already been implemented in various international markets with great success. A study conducted among Australian patients revealed an 86% satisfaction rate when it came to the quality and convenience provided by virtual visits compared to traditional face-to-face appointments (Jiang et al., 2019). Additionally, research conducted on Canadian health systems found that implementing telehealth in remote areas was a cost effective investment as evidenced by increased patient engagement and improved clinical outcomes (Newhook et al., 2018).
In terms of its implications on rural communities within the U.S., telehealth could be beneficial in reducing transportation costs associated with traveling long distances for medical appointments. It could also provide more accessible mental health services due to its ability eliminate long wait times typically experienced at physical clinics or hospitals (Chao & Greer 2020). Furthermore, it removes geographic limitations for receiving specialty care which would benefit individuals living in underserved areas who might otherwise not have access due their location or financial resources.
Overall, evidence gathered from international studies demonstrates that providing access to care via telemedicine is an effective way of reaching people who live in remote locations and may lack other resources normally required for obtaining quality healthcare services. Therefore, this strategy should be further explored so it may benefit those living within rural U.S communities who are often left underserved due to economic constraints or remoteness of their location
Vittola, first and foremost, talks about one of the noble motivations of war, above all, is when mischief is incurred however he causes notice the damage doesn’t prompt conflict, it relies upon the degree or proportionality, one more condition to jus promotion bellum (Begby et al (2006b), Page 314). Frowe, nonetheless, contends the possibility of “worthy motivation” in view of “Power” which alludes to the security of political and regional freedoms, alongside basic liberties. In contemporary view, this view is more confounded to reply, given the ascent of globalization. Additionally, it is challenging to gauge proportionality, especially in war, on the grounds that not just that there is an epistemic issue in ascertaining, yet again the present world has created (Frowe (2011), Page 54-6). Besides, Vittola contends war is essential, not just for cautious purposes, ‘since it is legitimate to oppose force with force,’ yet additionally to battle against the crooked, a hostile conflict, countries which are not rebuffed for acting treacherously towards its own kin or have unjustifiably taken land from the home country (Begby et al (2006b), Page 310&313); to “show its foes a thing or two,” yet for the most part to accomplish the point of war. This approves Aristotle’s contention: ‘there should be battle for harmony (Aristotle (1996), Page 187). Nonetheless, Frowe contends “self-preservation” has a majority of portrayals, found in Chapter 1, demonstrating the way that self-protection can’t necessarily in every case legitimize one’s activities. Considerably more dangerous, is the situation of self-preservation in war, where two clashing perspectives are laid out: The Collectivists, an entirely different hypothesis and the Individualists, the continuation of the homegrown hypothesis of self-protection (Frowe (2011), Page 9& 29-34). All the more significantly, Frowe discredits Vittola’s view on retribution in light of the fact that right off the bat it enables the punisher’s position, yet additionally the present world forestalls this activity between nations through legitimate bodies like the UN, since we have modernized into a somewhat tranquil society (Frowe (2011), Page 80-1). In particular, Frowe further discredits Vittola through his case that ‘right aim can’t be blamed so as to take up arms in light of expected wrong,’ proposing we can’t simply hurt another on the grounds that they have accomplished something uncalled for. Different elements should be thought of, for instance, Proportionality. Thirdly, Vittola contends that war ought to be kept away from (Begby et al (2006b), Page 332) and that we ought to continue conditions carefully. This is upheld by the “last resor