Telemedicine has now transitioned from a temporary solution during the COVID-19 pandemic to a permanent feature of modern healthcare. This is the key message highlighted internationally in recent years, as remote health services become integral to healthcare systems. At the same time, institutional warnings are rising: telemedicine brings clear benefits but also carries risks that, if unaddressed, could undermine care quality and patient-professional trust.
In a recent report, the World Health Organization (WHO) stressed that “telemedicine can provide faster and easier access to healthcare services, but it requires measurable quality standards and systematic oversight.” Without such measures, the WHO warns, “trust in both the services and the professionals providing them could be compromised.”
Since March 2024, the WHO has emphasised the need to strengthen telemedicine governance, introducing tools to evaluate the quality of remote healthcare. Rapid adoption, particularly after the pandemic, has often outpaced clear guidelines on when and how telemedicine should be used. In many countries, telemedicine has grown as a practical necessity rather than a deliberate policy choice, resulting in significant variations in service quality, professional training, and monitoring mechanisms. The recent WHO report urges countries to invest not only in expanding technology use but also in rules, evaluation, and transparency.
Cyprus: Telemedicine in practice
In Cyprus, telemedicine has gradually become a daily practice, though public discussion on its limits has been limited. In practice, it spans telephone consultations, remote submission of test results, follow-up assessments, and online mental health sessions. For both general practitioners and specialists - particularly under the GESY system - telemedicine is a tool that facilitates work. Direct contact with patients reduces waiting times, speeds follow-up, and helps manage chronic cases. In a high-demand healthcare system, remote access is often essential for maintaining functionality.
However, telemedicine has drawbacks. Physical presence is crucial in the doctor-patient relationship - not just for diagnosis but for building trust. The absence of in-person clinical assessment can lead to incomplete symptom evaluation, while remote communication often limits the observation of non-verbal cues important for clinical judgement. Furthermore, not all patients can access telemedicine equally, especially older adults or those with low digital literacy.
International measures and best practices
These concerns are reflected in measures adopted internationally, as noted in the WHO report. The trend is not rejection of telemedicine, but its integration under stricter regulatory frameworks with clear rules and limits:
-
United Kingdom: From 1 June 2025, regulations prohibit prescribing injectable cosmetic procedures remotely without prior in-person assessment. This includes substances such as Botox and dermal fillers. Remote evaluation is considered insufficient to safely assess anatomy, contraindications, or potential complications. Telemedicine is also not recommended as the sole method for diagnosing complex or new conditions, but can be used for follow-up.
-
Germany: The system allows telemedicine mainly for follow-up, chronic conditions, or cases with prior physical examination. Remote-only diagnosis for new cases is considered inadequate. Quantitative limits were previously imposed on the percentage of remote consultations per doctor (around 20%) to prevent full replacement of in-person care. The principle remains: telemedicine cannot become the default medical contact, and patients retain the right to request physical examinations.
-
Australia: Regulatory guidelines updated in 2025 emphasise clinicians’ responsibility. Telemedicine is unsuitable for new cases with unclear or complex symptoms, or where physical examination, palpation, or direct observation is needed. Doctors must document reasons for using telemedicine and remain professionally accountable if an in-person assessment proves necessary. While no specific criminal penalties exist solely for telemedicine misuse, cases fall under general disciplinary and professional oversight, with sanctions possible for negligence or guideline breaches.
This article was originally published in the Politis daily newspaper.
