On 8 July 2025, the second of the Conversations in Virtual Care series of the IHF Virtual Care Special Interest Group (SIG), hosted in collaboration with Apollo Hospitals Group, brought together international experts to discuss how virtual care is funded and delivered in diverse healthcare systems. Chaired by Dr Sai Praveen Haranath, SVP Apollo HealthAxis, the discussion highlighted the shared challenges and innovative strategies being explored in Indonesia, Norway, and Australia. 

Common goals, different approaches 

Despite differences in healthcare infrastructure and scale, all panelists agreed on the high potential of virtual care to improve access to healthcare, particularly for remote and underserved populations, and support the workforce. 

• Indonesia is leveraging its national health insurance (covering over 95% of citizens) to pilot primary care teleconsultations through government apps like Mobile JKN, and is supported through national and local government budgets. A regulatory sandbox for telehealth start-ups has been launched to ensure safety, quality, and sustainable business models. Indonesia is moving towards hybrid funding models for virtual care, blending capitation, fee for service, and private partnerships, but integration with UHC reimbursement remains a work in progress.

• Norway has integrated virtual care into its single-payer system (Ministry of Health and Care Services). Video consultations currently make up 9% of outpatient visits and are reimbursed as for in-person visits. Notably, Oslo University Hospital has introduced digital self-reporting tools for cancer patients, reducing unnecessary follow-up visits by up to one-third. However, the current funding model doesn’t encourage this kind of efficiency, as reimbursement is paid per patient not per consultation. 

• Australia experienced a surge in telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic, jumping from 0.05% to 36% of consultations, before stabilizing at around 23%. While both government and private sectors have embraced virtual care, challenges persist around fragmented systems, reimbursement policies, and scaling innovation across jurisdictions. 

Funding models need to evolve 

A key theme throughout the conversation was that funding systems must change. Today, many models pay based on the number of visits, instead of rewarding long-term, proactive care. 

Dr Robert Marshall, Chief Strategy Officer at St Vincent’s Health Australia, advocated for flexible payment models that give providers the flexibility to deliver care across the full patient journey, including virtual and in-home care. Dr Sigbjørn Smeland, Head of the Cancer Clinic, Oslo University Hospital, Norway, emphasized that without proper financial structures, hospitals risk losing revenue when reducing unnecessary visits, even if it’s the right clinical decision. 

Anis Fuad, Head of Informatics Division at the Indonesian Hospital Association (PERSI), added that defining fair reimbursement rates under national insurance is very important, especially as new forms of virtual care emerge through Indonesia’s support of start-ups. 

Safeguarding quality and ensuring equity 

Speakers agreed that virtual care needs the same strong quality standards as traditional, in-person care. While many countries have clear rules for physical consultations, virtual care standards are still developing. 

Indonesia’s regulatory sandbox is showing early success in helping define quality with input from both government and private companies. The panelists also discussed the future of cross-border care, where patients could receive expert help from other countries, at lower costs, much like how other global industries operate today. 

Looking ahead 

AI, remote monitoring tools, and digital check-ins are no longer theoretical, they are widely available and improving rapidly. But adoption depends on supportive policies, provider confidence, and having proper funding models in place. 

Robert Marshall noted that while technology has never been more accessible, a comprehensive virtual care model requires financial investment in cybersecurity, training, and system integration, in addition to the costs of the technology. 

Dr Smeland pointed out that even older patients in Norway are using virtual tools successfully, especially in cancer care, showing that people are ready, if the systems support them – this includes a strong financial system. 

Dr Sai shared the experience within Apollo and India while observing the similarities in the progress of virtual care as well as the challenges encountered. The discussion concluded with a call to better alignment between how care is paid for, how it’s delivered, and what patients need. Everyone agreed that virtual care shouldn’t be seen as just an emergency solution, but a permanent, inclusive part of global healthcare systems. 

You can listen again to the discussion here! The next Conversation in Virtual Care will be on 2 September (15:00 CEST) and will explore trust, quality, and safety in virtual care delivery.