Telehealth in palliative care settings: A systematic review of argument-based ethics literature

The need for palliative care is rising rapidly, but meeting global demand is falling behind. Telepalliative care offers a potential solution, though its implementation requires careful ethical evaluation.

To provide an overview of the ethical concepts and arguments related to telepalliative care as presented in the argument-based literature.

We conducted a systematic review of argument-based literature following PRISMA-guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD42024533732). Data extraction and synthesis followed the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven.

We searched 12 databases covering medical, ethical, and technological disciplines using broad, unfiltered terms. Publications in English, French, German, or Dutch on telehealth, palliative care, and ethics were considered. Two researchers independently screened publications, using peer review as a quality proxy due to the lack of standards for argument-based literature.

Twenty-six publications were included. Two main ethical approaches emerged: one related to the four principles of biomedical ethics and the other to care. Regarding respect for autonomy, telepalliative care may both promote and limit autonomy, with concerns raised about informed consent, privacy, and confidentiality. Regarding beneficence, potential improvements in symptom management and quality of life were identified. Regarding non-maleficence, risks such as replacing in-person care and medicalizing the home environment were highlighted. Regarding justice, issues of access, equity, distributive justice, and environmental issues were addressed. Concerns about the patient-provider relationship and holistic care were central to care-related arguments.

Telehealth's benefits challenge its incompatibility with palliative care, however, significant risks threaten core palliative care values. Thus, careful implementation must prioritize ethical considerations.