HighlightsTelehealth serviced a range of ages, cancer diagnoses and treatment intents.Tele-radiation oncology consultations reduced travel and time burden for patients.Patients reported an overall high level of satisfaction with telehealth consultation.

Implementation of the QReCS model across a large geographic region is feasible with acceptable safety profiles. Leadership by and collaboration among clinicians and managers, adequacy of resources and common governance are key enablers.

BackgroundLung cancer referral pathways aim to reduce delays and improve referral patterns of people with suspected lung cancer.AimAs part of implementing a lung cancer referral pathway at a regional Australian hospital, this study aimed to explore the experiences and perceptions of people with lung cancer and their carers.MethodsIn‐depth interviews were used to elicit data for thematic analysis in this cross‐sectional descriptive qualitative study. Patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer and their carers at a regional academic cancer centre were invited to participate in interviews. Five interviews were conducted face‐to‐face, and 14 interviews were conducted by telephone (as per interviewee preference). Interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed and qualitatively analysed. Descriptive phrases were used to generate initial inductive codes and themes.ResultsNineteen participants approached agreed to take part in the study. Factors that positively impacted the care experience were good communication, timeliness and patient advocacy and support. Improper communication, long waiting times for investigations and appointments, uncertainty about the process and inconsistent advice from providers negatively impacted the care experience. Participants preferred face‐to‐face or video‐linked consultations over telephone consultations.ConclusionsUnderstanding the experiences of rural and regional patients and carers with the lung cancer referral pathway is important to improve quality of care. Implementing changes to the referral pathway to improve patient and carer experiences needs to be an ongoing quality improvement exercise.

Background: Research is central to high functioning health services alongside clinical care and health professional training. The impact of embedded research includes delivery of high-quality care and improved patient outcomes. Evaluations of research impact help health service leadership ensure investments lead to the greatest healthcare benefits for patients. This study aimed to retrospectively evaluate the impact of research investment from 2008 to 2018 at Townsville Hospital and Health Service (THHS), a regional Hospital and Health Service in Queensland, Australia. The evaluation also sought to identify contextual conditions that enable or hinder intended impacts. Methods: A mixed-methods realist-informed evaluation was conducted using documentation, interviews with 15 staff and available databases to identify and measure research investments, impacts and contextual conditions influencing impact outcomes. Results: Between 2008 and 2018, THHS increased resources for research by funding research projects, employing research personnel, building research-enabling facilities, hosting research events, and providing research education and training. Clinical practice, policy and workforce impacts were successful in isolated pockets, championed by individual researchers and facilitated by their policy and community-of-practice networks. However, there was little organisational-level support for continuity of research and implementation into practice and policy. Availability of research supports varied geographically across THHS, and across disciplines. Conclusion: Definitive steps in the development of THHS as a credible and productive research centre and leading hospital research centre in Northern Australia are evident. Continuing investments should address support for the research continuum through to translation and establish ongoing, systematic processes for evaluating research investment and impact.