Background: The use of information technology, such as internet- and telephone-based resources, is becoming an alternative and supplementary approach for offering numerous types of services in the healthcare and health management setting. Telephone consultations offer a viable substitute and supplementary service for in-person general practise care. The purpose of this systematic review is to compile evidence about the use of telephone consultation as an alternative to in-person general practise appointments. Methods and Methods: We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform utilising the search criteria for the intervention (telephone consultation) and the comparison group (general practice). This review comprised systematic reviews and randomised controlled studies that compared telephone consultation to face-to-face consultation in general practise. The papers were examined, assessed for quality (using the "Risk of bias" tool of the Cochrane Collaboration), and data were retrieved and analysed. Two systematic reviews and one randomised controlled trial were discovered and included in the study. Results: Patients requesting same-day appointments from two general practises were assigned to either a same-day face-to-face visit or a telephone call back consultation in the randomised controlled trial (N = 388). There was a decrease in the amount of time spent on consultations in the telephone group (1.5 min (0.6 to 2.4)), and patients in the telephone arm had 0.2% (0 to 0.3%) more follow-up consultations than those in the face-to-face group. One systematic review focused on telephone consultation and triage on healthcare utilisation and included one randomised controlled trial and one other observational study examining telephone consultations. The other systematic review investigated patient access and included one randomised controlled trial and four observational studies examining telephone consultations. Both systematic evaluations offered narrative interpretations of the evidence and concluded that telephone consultations were a suitable alternative to in-person consultations and reduced practise workload. Conclusions: There is a dearth of high-level evidence for telephone consultations in a GP environment; nonetheless, existing evidence suggests that telephone consultations as an alternative to in-person general practise consultations may be an appropriate option in certain settings.