Technical and Professional Barriers to the Implementation of Telemedicine in Itumbiara
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.66104/8qx3h441Keywords:
Telemedicine, Primary Health Care, Training, Unified Health SystemAbstract
Introduction: Telemedicine has been officially recognized in Brazil since 2002 and began to be implemented within the scope of the Unified Health System (SUS) through initiatives of the Ministry of Health, becoming a strategy to expand access to healthcare, especially in contexts marked by structural limitations and shortage of professionals. Objective: To analyze the technical and professional barriers that hinder the effective implementation of telemedicine in Primary Health Care in the municipality of Itumbiara (GO), in order to propose improvements for its integration into local medical practice. Materials and Methods: This is a field-based, observational, descriptive study with a quantitative-qualitative approach, conducted between February and November 2025 in Itumbiara (GO). The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee (opinion no. 7,672,153) and authorized by the Municipal Health Department. A total of 41 physicians with active registration at CRM-GO participated voluntarily and signed the informed consent form. The quantitative stage consisted of a structured questionnaire answered by 40 physicians. The qualitative stage consisted of a semi-structured interview with 1 physician responsible for the implementation of telemedicine in the municipal outpatient clinic. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and qualitative data were examined through thematic content analysis, according to Bardin (2016). Results and Discussion: Telemedicine had been used by 65.0% (26/40) of respondents. Among users (n=26), rare use predominated (65.4%). The main barriers were the lack of physical interaction with patients (42.5%), low patient adherence (37.5%), internet instability (35.0%), and insufficient specific training (17.5%). Despite these challenges, 92.3% (36/39) considered telemedicine essential for the future of healthcare. Conclusion: Telemedicine in Itumbiara faces structural, professional, and cultural challenges. Investments in digital infrastructure, continuous professional training, and technological literacy of the population are essential to strengthen its implementation within the SUS.
Keywords: Telemedicine. Primary Health Care. Training. Unified Health System.
Downloads
References
1. Gebran JPN, Roman R. Telemedicina no Sistema Único de Saúde. In: Schaefer F, Glitz F, orgs. Telemedicina: desafios éticos e regulatórios. São Paulo: Foco; 2022. p. 15–40.
2. Harzheim E, Gonçalves MR, Umpierre RN, et al. Telehealth in Brazil: a national experience of scaling up primary care teleconsultations. Telemed J E Health. 2016;22(10):821–7. doi:10.1089/tmj.2015.0178.
3. Messina LA, et al. A Rede Universitária de Telemedicina – RUTE. Gold Book Inov Tecnol Educ Saúde. 2012;56–85.
4. Rios BC, et al. Telemedicina: uma revisão sistemática sobre desafios, oportunidades e perspectivas futuras. Ciênc Saúde. 2024;28.
5. Brasil. Ministério da Educação. Diretrizes Curriculares Nacionais do Curso de Graduação em Medicina. Brasília (DF): MEC; 2025.
6. Brasil. Lei nº 13.709, de 14 de agosto de 2018. Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados Pessoais. Diário Oficial da União. 2018 ago 15.
7. Bardin L. Análise de conteúdo. Lisboa: Edições 70; 2016.
8. Santos WS, et al. Reflexões acerca do uso da telemedicina no Brasil: oportunidade ou ameaça? Rev Gest Sist Saúde. 2020;9(3):433–43.
9. Palma EM, Klein AZ, Pedron CD. The acceptance of telemedicine by physicians in Brazil: an institutional theory view. Electron J Inf Syst Dev Ctries. 2023;89(2):e12254. doi:10.1002/isd2.12254.
10. Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Avaliação de Tecnologias em Saúde: seleção de estudos apoiados pelo Decit. 2ª ed. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2014. Disponível em: https://www.arca.fiocruz.br/handle/icict/44700.
11. Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Estratégia de Saúde Digital para o Brasil 2020–2028. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2020. Disponível em: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/publicacoes/estrategia_saude_digital_Brasil.pdf
12. Caetano R, Silva AB, Guedes ACCM, Paiva CCN, Ribeiro GR, Santos DL, et al. Challenges and opportunities for telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic: ideas on spaces and initiatives in the Brazilian context. Cad Saude Publica. 2020;36(5):e00088920. doi:10.1590/0102-311X00088920.
13. Kruse CS, Krowski N, Rodriguez B, Tran L, Vela J, Brooks M. Telehealth and patient satisfaction: a systematic review and narrative analysis. BMJ Open. 2017;7(8):e016242. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016242.
14. Strehle EM, Shabde N. One hundred years of telemedicine: does this new technology have a place in paediatrics? Arch Dis Child. 2006;91(12):956–9.
15. Fernandes JM, et al. Percepção dos profissionais de saúde sobre o uso da teleconsulta em diferentes contextos assistenciais no Brasil. Rev Bras Educ Méd. 2023;47(2):e068. doi:10.1590/1981-5271v47.2-20230068.
16. Pinto AL, et al. Determinantes institucionais da adesão à telemedicina no Brasil: um estudo multicêntrico sobre barreiras e potencialidades. Rev Adm Pública. 2023;57(3):521–43. doi:10.1590/0034-761220230109.
17. Silva DSM, et al. Metodologias ativas e tecnologias digitais na educação médica: novos desafios em tempos de pandemia. Rev Bras Educ Méd. 2022;46.
18. Chagas MEV, et al. A telemedicina está preparada para contornar as barreiras de implementação no Brasil? Experiências do TeleNordeste. Rev Bras Med Fam Comunidade. 2025;19(46):4010. doi:10.5712/rbmfc19(46)4010.
19. Souza CHA, Morbeck RA, Steinman M, Hors CP, Bracco MM, Kozasa EL, et al. Barriers and Benefits in Telemedicine Arising Between a High-Technology Hospital Service Provider and Remote Public Healthcare Units: A Qualitative Study in Brazil. Telemed J E Health. 2017;23(6):527–32. doi:10.1089/tmj.2016.0158.
20. Costa FA, et al. Avaliação de programas de telessaúde no Norte e Nordeste do Brasil: impactos e desafios. Rev Bras Saúde Mater Infant. 2023;23(2):305–16. doi:10.1590/1519-38292023025.
21. Massuda A, Hone T, Leles FAG, de Castro MC, Atun R. The Brazilian health system at crossroads: progress, crisis and resilience. BMJ Glob Health. 2018;3(4):e000829. doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000829.
22. Nakayama T, et al. Desigualdade digital e acesso à saúde remota no Brasil. Interface (Botucatu). 2023;27:e220019. doi:10.1590/interface.220019.
23. Araújo DC, et al. TeleNordeste: experiência de integração digital e ampliação da telessaúde na atenção primária nordestina. Rev Bras Med Fam Comunidade. 2023;18(45):3128–40. doi:10.5712/rbmfc18(45)3128.
24. Taques TI, et al. Expansão da telessaúde na Atenção Primária à Saúde e as desigualdades regionais no Brasil. RECIIS. 2023;17(2):349–71. doi:10.29397/reciis.v17i2.3545.
25. Araújo HPA, et al. Telemedicine: the experience of health professionals in the supplementary sector. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2023;57:e20220374. doi:10.1590/1980-220X-REEUSP-2022-0374en.
26. Almeida OAE, Lima MEF, Santos WS, Silva BLM. Telehealth strategies in the care of people with chronic kidney disease: integrative review. Rev Latino-Am Enfermagem. 2023;31:e4050. doi:10.1590/1518-8345.6824.4050.
27. World Health Organization. Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) [Internet]. Geneva: WHO; 2025 [cited 2025 Oct 20]. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/noncommunicable-diseases.
28. Tavares J, Oliveira T, Santos M, et al. Telemedicine in primary health care in Brazil: a scoping review. Rev Saude Publica. 2022;56:96. doi:10.11606/s1518-8787.2022056003890.
29. Bashshur RL, Shannon GW, Smith BR, et al. The empirical foundations of telemedicine interventions in primary care. Telemed J E Health. 2014;20(5):342–375. doi:10.1089/tmj.2014.9981.
30. Menezes LG, et al. Percepções médicas sobre o uso da telemedicina no SUS: um estudo transversal. Rev Saúde Pública. 2024;58(1):1–10.
31. Golinelli D, Boetto E, Carullo G, Nuzzolese AG, Landini MP, Fantini MP. Adoption of digital technologies in health care during COVID-19: systematic review of early scientific literature. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22(11):e22280. doi:10.2196/22280.
32. Monaghesh E, Hajizadeh A. The role of telehealth during COVID-19 outbreak: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2020;20:1193. doi:10.1186/s12889-020-09301-4.
33. World Health Organization. Telemedicine: opportunities and developments in Member States: report on the second global survey on eHealth [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010. Available from: https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/44497.
34. Valente SE. Aspectos regulatórios da telemedicina no Brasil: repercussões sobre a responsabilidade das equipes de saúde [tese]. São Paulo: Universidade de São Paulo; 2018.
35. Scudeller PG, et al. Telemedicine in Brazil: teleconsultations at the largest University Hospital in the country. Telemed Rep. 2023;4(1):193–203. doi:10.1089/tmr.2023.0012.
36. Keesara S, Jonas A, Schulman K. Covid-19 and health care’s digital revolution. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:e82. doi:10.1056/NEJMp2005835.
37. Topol EJ. High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):44–56. doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0300-7.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 RSV
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
