The launch of digital clinic operations in public health care is a major effort and a change in the way we operate, especially if the service production is entirely our own. We at SoteDataLab were asked if the data show any emerging positive indications that the digital clinic activity could achieve its objectives. In this blog, we highlight four positive signs. At the same time, we note that there are still a number of important and currently open issues that require further examination.
1. Digital clinics have been popular with customers
In many wellbeing services counties, the number of users and usages of the digital clinic has increased rapidly immediately after opening. This may indicate that in many cases, customers have considered the chat of a digital clinic to be the best way to contact them instead of a telephone service. Digital clinics would hardly be used if customers did not feel that they would benefit from their use.
For example, the Digital Clinic of the Pirkanmaa region was contacted more than 217,000 times during its first year of operation (2024-2025). This corresponds to approximately 0.40 contacts per inhabitant per year.1 Over time, the use of the digital clinic also seems to have increased: The Harju Digital Health Clinic, which was introduced in the Päijät-Häme region in 2021, received 0.23 visits per inhabitant in its first year of operation2 (initially only Lahti, Kärkölä and Iitti), but in 2024 there were already 0.49 visits per inhabitant3 – i.e. an increase of more than 100% in just a few years.
The number of visits to digital clinics is starting to be significant, at least in some regions - especially in Päijät-Häme and Pirkanmaa. At the same time, in 2024, an average of 0.7 nurses’ face-to-face and 1.1 nurses’ face-to-face contact (including phone calls and video consultations) per inhabitant was recorded across the country in outpatient public health care.4 Nurses often act as the customer's first contact and are also responsible for a large part of the receptions at public digital clinics.
2. Digital service has also benefited customers from the perspective of professionals
In the Ostrobothnia wellbeing services county, the digital clinic platform asks the nursing professional after each medical care chat contact, (a) whether remote service was beneficial for the customer and (b) whether it reduced the customer's need to call or visit the premises. During the first two months of operation of the Digital Clinic, the feedback from professionals has been very positive: 93 % the professional reported that the remote service was beneficial to the customer, and 79 % In some cases, it reduces the need for further contact.5
It also seems that, as experienced by professionals, many service needs are solved at the digital clinic. For example, in Päijät-Häme, according to Harju's health, 86 out of digital clinic contacts in 2024 % Solved in a digital clinic, 8 % redirected to a rush reception or an on-call service and 6 % received an appointment for a non-urgent in-person appointment.3
However, the results must be interpreted cautiously. In the case of Ostrobothnia, there were 1400 professional feedbacks during the review period, even though there were significantly more customer contacts (there were 1900 customer contacts identified as Suomi.fi and a total of 2400 discussions). There is probably a selection bias, in which case it is possible that professionals with positive experiences have been more sensitive to feedback than those with negative experiences. On the other hand, feedback is often given, especially when something is not working and improvements are hoped for. It may also be that those professionals who are particularly interested in the new service form may have applied for the operation of the digital clinic, which may partly explain the positive feedback. In the case of Päijät-Häme, on the other hand, the solution level of the service needs at the digital clinic is a professional assessment at the time of the digital clinic contact, and it does not tell what services and how much the customer actually used before and after the digital clinic contact.
3. Digital clinics have brought wider opening hours and there is a clear demand for them
In many regions, digital clinics serve customers beyond the opening hours of traditional health centres – and this is also reflected in the data. In our study6 We found that in the records of public digital clinics 17 % were outside office hours (from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.), compared to 7% for in-person visits. On weekends, too, the use of digital clinics was clearly higher: 7 % of the digital clinic visits took place during the weekend, while the share of in-person visits was only 2 %. Therefore, there has been a demand for longer opening hours, which have generated added value for customers.
It is likely that there would be more demand for public digital clinic services outside office hours if the opening hours were further extended. The comparison is provided by private outpatient care, where the service is widely available also outside office hours. There from remote transactions (including phone calls and video receptions) as many as 31 % took place outside office hours and 12 % on weekends.
Customers will benefit from longer opening hours, but longer opening hours may not always be appropriate for the service system. Do you need to rebuild your cholesterol medication on Saturday? Does the patient's state of health really depend on whether they receive non-urgent treatment on Sunday or Monday? In addition, different pay models in the public and private sectors affect how sensible it is to provide services outside office hours or on weekends.
4. Digital clinics are used in many population groups; On the other hand, certain groups are highlighted.
In our study, we found that public digital clinics have users in every age and income group, although among non-Finnish or Swedish speakers, the prevalence of customership was particularly low.7 The preliminary result of our study, which will be published later in the autumn, is that the more people had access to public outpatient care before the digital clinic was opened, the more people had public visits to digital clinics on average. In other words, elderly people, people on low incomes and those who use public services a lot also visit public digital clinics. This challenges the general assumption that digital services are only available to young people or the best performers.
New digital clinic services should therefore be able to reach many population groups, although certain groups are better than others. Looking at:6 for example, the share of digital clinic services in all public outpatient care services or which of the outpatients in public outpatient care had digital clinic services, certain features are highlighted in digital users: women, children and young adults, the upper half of the income distribution and those living further away from the nearest health centre. When looking at which public digital clinic had out-of-hours digital clinic services, the focus is on women, children and young people. The preliminary result of an unfinished study to be published later in the autumn is that the more people had access to public outpatient care before the digital clinic was opened, the lower the share of digital clinic services in all public outpatient care services was.
What do we not know yet?
Above, we suggested that there has been a demand for digital clinic services and their wider opening hours, and the services have been perceived to be beneficial to customers by professionals. However, we don't know much about the digital clinic yet. use effects, if we require a gold standard for causality assessment, i.e. a randomised comparative design or, alternatively, impact assessments based on the most plausible natural experimental designs.
An open question, for example, is: Does the use of digital clinics result in a decrease in the number of contacts by phone and attendance? To what extent is it possible to alleviate the pressure on health centres through digital clinic operations? It is expected that after the opening of the digital clinic, the total number of contacts will increase when both digital, telephone and face-to-face contacts are combined. This is because the digital clinic, in addition to familiar alternatives, lowers the threshold for transactions, and the digital clinic is hardly the perfect substitute for telephone or attendance. Many would certainly hope that the digital clinic service would reduce telephone and attendance to such an extent that it will curb the total costs of primary healthcare despite the increase in demand, i.e. that we will have more contacts and a better customer experience at the same price or even at a lower price. This may not be the case – for example, if access to telephone and attendance services has been very limited. In the SoteDataLab project, we aim to answer the question of whether digital clinic services reduce traditional services at a health centre by means of a randomised comparative study carried out in cooperation with the Ostrobothnian wellbeing services county, the results of which we will report in early 2026.8
The open question is how much of the customer's service needs can really be solved with one digital clinic contact. We are conducting a study that examines the use of health services in different channels (remote and attendance services) in different sectors (public, private, occupational health) two weeks before and after the public digital clinic contact. Further research is also needed on digital clinic services for those who use public services a lot. It would also be important to hear more about customers' experiences of the use and benefits of a digital clinic.
Read more
In May 2025, the population coverage of public digital clinics rose to over 4.3 million.
What are the differences between digital clinic solutions in wellbeing services counties?
Category: Bloggers
Tapio Haaga, Lotta Virtanen, Alex Kivimäki, Vivi Mauno and other SoteDataLab team.
We would like to thank Kaisa Kujansivu for her comments.
- Source: https://www.pirha.fi/w/kaikenikaiset-ovat-loytaneet-digiklinikan-erityisen-suosittu-ruuhkavuosia-elavien-keskuudessa, read on 18.6.2025.[↩]
- Source: https://harjunterveys.fi/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Harjun-terveyden-vuosikertomus_2021.pdf, read on 18.6.2025.[↩]
- Source: https://harjunterveys.fi/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Harjun-terveys-2024.pdf, read on 18.6.2025.[↩][↩]
- Source: https://thl.fi/tilastot-ja-data/aineistot-ja-palvelut/avoin-data (Avohilmo), read 18.6.2025.[↩]
- Source: Well-being area of Ostrobothnia.[↩]
- Source: https://osf.io/ey7bn, read on 18.6.2025.[↩][↩]
- Source: https://osf.io/ey7bn, read 18.6.2025[↩]
- Read more: https://stm.fi/-/pohjanmaan-hyvinvointialueella-on-kaynnissa-satunnaistettu-kokeilu-digitaalisten-terveyspalveluiden-vaikutuksista, read on 18.6.2025.[↩]