On October 7 2025, Ahpra released updated guidance on telehealth and virtual care, reinforcing that patients must receive high-quality care ‘whether it be in-person, over-the-phone or online’.
The updated framework expands advice for practitioners using telehealth, particularly in relation to prescribing practices and accountability, and responds to what Ahpra describes as ‘concerns around unethical practice and emerging business models focused more on profit than patient safety’.
In a statement, Ahpra said the revised guidance ‘ensures proper consultation and practitioner accountability’, highlighting poor practice concerns around prescribing that relies on text, email or online questionnaires to assess a patients’ needs rather than a face-to-face consultation.
‘Telehealth has been great in making it easier for people to get the care they need. We just want to make sure that convenience doesn’t come at the cost of safety or quality,’ Ahpra Chief Executive Officer, Justin Untersteiner said.
The updated guidance is consistent with the Medical Board of Australia’s guidelines, Telehealth consultations with patients, and confirms there are the same expectations for all practitioners when providing safe and effective telehealth services.
What counts as a consultation?
Ahpra’s press release accompanying the update stated that good practice includes ‘only prescribing if you’ve consulted with the patient face-to-face before’.
However, the guidance itself provides a broader and more explicit definition of what constitutes a legitimate consultation. It states:
‘Be aware National Boards do not support or consider it good practice to prescribe medicine or other assistive technologies (for example orthoses or glasses, or mobility aids) for a patient that a practitioner has never consulted, whether face-to-face, via video or telephone. This includes requests for medicine or other health services communicated by text, email or online that do not take place in real time or are based on the patient completing a health questionnaire where the practitioner has not formally consulted with the patient. The Boards do not consider an online chat to be a synchronous (in real time) consultation.’
In effect, this means that a real-time consultation – conducted in person, by video or by telephone – meets the threshold of good practice. By contrast, asynchronous models, such as text, email or online questionnaires without a live interaction, do not meet professional standards. An online chat or questionnaire is not considered a real-time consultation. Practitioners issuing prescriptions without a live interaction (ie, by text, email or automated system), may be required to justify how their prescribing met professional and legislative standards.
Addressing safety, consent and technology use
Beyond prescribing, the document reiterates core professional responsibilities when using telehealth: identity verification, privacy protection, informed consent and continuity of care. It also introduces guidance on the safe use of new technologies such as AI scribes and chatbots, advising practitioners to consider how such tools capture and store patient information.
Ahpra said the guidance will continue to evolve ‘to reflect new developments in telehealth and share updates from other regulators’, underscoring that telehealth is not appropriate for all consultations or treatment types.
Context for aesthetic medicine
The updated guidance comes amid heightened regulatory attention to prescribing and delegation in cosmetic practice. Recent reforms – including Ahpra’s Guidelines for registered medical practitioners who perform cosmetic procedures (effective 2 September 2025) – already prohibit asynchronous prescribing of Schedule 4 injectables such as botulinum toxin and dermal fillers. The telehealth update also follows on from Ahpra’s recently revised National Prescribing Competencies Framework, which clarifies expectations around off-label prescribing and practitioner accountability.
For aesthetic prescribers, the emphasis on continuity of care and documentation aligns with the broader shift toward stronger clinical governance in cosmetic medicine. Practitioners remain responsible for follow-up, adverse event management, and ensuring that delegated injectors operate within scope and under appropriate supervision.
