Midwives', Obstetricians', and Recently Delivered Mothers' Perceptions of Remote Monitoring for Prenatal Care: Retrospective Survey

Dorien Lanssens, Thijs Vandenberk, Joy Lodewijckx, Tessa Peeters, Valerie Storms, Inge M Thijs, Lars Grieten, Wilfried Gyselaers, Dorien Lanssens, Thijs Vandenberk, Joy Lodewijckx, Tessa Peeters, Valerie Storms, Inge M Thijs, Lars Grieten, Wilfried Gyselaers

Abstract

Background: The Pregnancy Remote Monitoring (PREMOM) study enrolled pregnant women at increased risk of developing hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and investigated the effect of remote monitoring in addition to their prenatal follow-up.

Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate the perceptions and experiences of remote monitoring among mothers, midwives, and obstetricians who participated in the PREMOM study.

Methods: We developed specific questionnaires for the mothers, midwives, and obstetricians addressing 5 domains: (1) prior knowledge and experience of remote monitoring, (2) reactions to abnormal values, (3) privacy, (4) quality and patient safety, and (5) financial aspects. We also questioned the health care providers about which issues they considered important when implementing remote monitoring. We used a 5-point Likert scale to provide objective scores. It was possible to add free-text feedback at every question.

Results: A total of 91 participants completed the questionnaires. The mothers, midwives, and obstetricians reported positive experiences and perceptions of remote monitoring, although most of them had no or little prior experience with this technology. They supported a further rollout of remote monitoring in Belgium. Nearly three-quarters of the mothers (34/47, 72%) did not report any problems with taking the measurements at the required times. Almost half of the mothers (19/47, 40%) wanted to be contacted within 3 to 12 hours after abnormal measurement values, preferably by telephone.

Conclusions: Although most of midwives and obstetricians had no or very little experience with remote monitoring before enrolling in the PREMOM study, they reported, based on their one-year experience, that remote monitoring was an important component in the follow-up of high-risk pregnancies and would recommend it to their colleagues and pregnant patients.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03246737; https://ichgcp.net/clinical-trials-registry/NCT03246737 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/76KVnHSYY).

Keywords: gestational hypertensive diseases; hypertension, pregnancy-induced; monitoring, ambulatory; questionnaires; remote monitoring; surveys and questionnaires.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

©Dorien Lanssens, Thijs Vandenberk, Joy Lodewijckx, Tessa Peeters, Valerie Storms, Inge M Thijs, Lars Grieten, Wilfried Gyselaers. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 15.04.2019.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Summary of responses from the midwives and obstetricians on the question “Please indicate with a score from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree): I had already experience with RM before this study.” RM: remote monitoring.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Summary of responses from the midwives and obstetricians to the question “Do you believe that RM improves the care for pregnant women with an increased risk of gestational complications? Please indicate with a score from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).” RM: remote monitoring.

References

    1. Forno E, Young OM, Kumar R, Simhan H, Celedón JC. Maternal obesity in pregnancy, gestational weight gain, and risk of childhood asthma. Pediatrics. 2014 Aug;134(2):e535–46. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-0439.
    1. Nerenberg K, Daskalopoulou SS, Dasgupta K. Gestational diabetes and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy as vascular risk signals: an overview and grading of the evidence. Can J Cardiol. 2014 Jul;30(7):765–73. doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2013.12.030.
    1. Whitworth M, Dowswell T. Routine pre-pregnancy health promotion for improving pregnancy outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Oct 07;(4):CD007536. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007536.pub2.
    1. Saner H, van der Velde E. eHealth in cardiovascular medicine: a clinical update. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2016 Oct;23(2 suppl):5–12. doi: 10.1177/2047487316670256.
    1. European Coordination Committee of the Radiological, Electromedical and Healthcare IT Industry . COCIR Telemedicine Toolkit for a better Deployment and Use of Telehealth. Brussels, Belgium: COCIR; 2011. May, [2019-02-14]. .
    1. American Diabetes Association Diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care. 2009 Jan;32 Suppl 1:S62–7. doi: 10.2337/dc09-S062.
    1. Ramani GV, Uber PA, Mehra MR. Chronic heart failure: contemporary diagnosis and management. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010 Feb;85(2):180–95. doi: 10.4065/mcp.2009.0494.
    1. Levy S. Atrial fibrillation, the arrhythmia of the elderly, causes and associated conditions. Anadolu Kardiyol Derg. 2002 Mar;2(1):55–60.
    1. Lanssens D, Vandenberk T, Smeets CJ, De Cannière H, Molenberghs G, Van Moerbeke A, van den Hoogen A, Robijns T, Vonck S, Staelens A, Storms V, Thijs IM, Grieten L, Gyselaers W. Remote monitoring of hypertension diseases in pregnancy: a pilot study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2017 Mar 09;5(3):e25. doi: 10.2196/mhealth.6552.
    1. Lanssens D, Vonck S, Storms V, Thijs IM, Grieten L, Gyselaers W. The impact of a remote monitoring program on the prenatal follow-up of women with gestational hypertensive disorders. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018 Apr;223:72–78. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2018.02.015.
    1. Corwin MJ, Mou SM, Sunderji SG, Gall S, How H, Patel V, Gray M. Multicenter randomized clinical trial of home uterine activity monitoring: pregnancy outcomes for all women randomized. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996 Nov;175(5):1281–5.
    1. Wapner RJ, Cotton DB, Artal R, Librizzi RJ, Ross MG. A randomized multicenter trial assessing a home uterine activity monitoring device used in the absence of daily nursing contact. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995 Mar;172(3):1026–34.
    1. Dalfrà MG, Nicolucci A, Lapolla A, TISG The effect of telemedicine on outcome and quality of life in pregnant women with diabetes. J Telemed Telecare. 2009;15(5):238–42. doi: 10.1258/jtt.2009.081213.
    1. Homko CJ, Santamore WP, Whiteman V, Bower M, Berger P, Geifman-Holtzman O, Bove AA. Use of an internet-based telemedicine system to manage underserved women with gestational diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2007 Jun;9(3):297–306. doi: 10.1089/dia.2006.0034.
    1. Pérez-Ferre N, Galindo M, Fernández MD, Velasco V, de la Cruz MJ, Martín P, del Valle L, Calle-Pascual AL. A Telemedicine system based on Internet and short message service as a new approach in the follow-up of patients with gestational diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2010 Feb;87(2):e15–7. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2009.12.002.
    1. Pérez-Ferre N, Galindo M, Fernández MD, Velasco V, Runkle I, de la Cruz MJ, Martín RP, del Valle L, Calle-Pascual AL. The outcomes of gestational diabetes mellitus after a telecare approach are not inferior to traditional outpatient clinic visits. Int J Endocrinol. 2010;2010:386941. doi: 10.1155/2010/386941. doi: 10.1155/2010/386941.
    1. Buysse H, De Moor G, Van Maele G, Baert E, Thienpont G, Temmerman M. Cost-effectiveness of telemonitoring for high-risk pregnant women. Int J Med Inform. 2008 Jul;77(7):470–6. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2007.08.009.
    1. Morrison J, Bergauer NK, Jacques D, Coleman SK, Stanziano GJ. Telemedicine: cost-effective management of high-risk pregnancy. Manag Care. 2001 Nov;10(11):42–6, 48.
    1. Rauf Z, O'Brien E, Stampalija T, Ilioniu FP, Lavender T, Alfirevic Z. Home labour induction with retrievable prostaglandin pessary and continuous telemetric trans-abdominal fetal ECG monitoring. PLoS One. 2011;6(11):e28129. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0028129.
    1. O'Brien E, Rauf Z, Alfirevic Z, Lavender T. Women's experiences of outpatient induction of labour with remote continuous monitoring. Midwifery. 2013 Apr;29(4):325–31. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2012.01.014.
    1. Kuleva M, Salomon LJ, Benoist G, Ville Y, Dumez Y. The value of daily fetal heart rate home monitoring in addition to serial ultrasound examinations in pregnancies complicated by fetal gastroschisis. Prenat Diagn. 2012 Aug;32(8):789–96. doi: 10.1002/pd.3903.
    1. Lanssens D, Vandenberk T, Smeets CJ, De Cannière H, Vonck S, Claessens J, Heyrman Y, Vandijck D, Storms V, Thijs IM, Grieten L, Gyselaers W. Prenatal remote monitoring of women with gestational hypertensive diseases: cost analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2018 Mar 26;20(3):e102. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9552.
    1. Giardina TD, Callen J, Georgiou A, Westbrook JI, Greisinger A, Esquivel A, Forjuoh SN, Parrish DE, Singh H. Releasing test results directly to patients: a multisite survey of physician perspectives. Patient Educ Couns. 2015 Jun;98(6):788–96. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2015.02.011.
    1. Beirlaen P, Bonroy B, Bruynseraede C, De Maesschalck L, De Maeyer C, De Raedt W, Dehouck J, Delameilleure M, Denie T, Dock P, Lambrechts M, Mattheus R, Meyvis W, Pype P, Ravellingen J, Roelandts H, Smolders R, Staelraeve S, Valckenaerts P, Van Asch K, Van Emelen J, Van Garsse S, Van Herck P, Van Hove D, Van Parijs J, van Vooren P, Vancayzeele S, Vanden Wijngaerts M, Verhenneman G, Willems P. [Mhealth as key to quality and affordability of care]. Whitepaper Voka Health Community mobile Health. Brussels, Belgium: Voka Health Community; 2015. [2019-02-14]. .
    1. Piwek L, Ellis DA. Can programming frameworks bring smartphones into the mainstream of psychological science? Front Psychol. 2016;7:1252. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01252. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01252.
    1. Toogood PA, Abdel MP, Spear JA, Cook SM, Cook DJ, Taunton MJ. The monitoring of activity at home after total hip arthroplasty. Bone Joint J. 2016 Nov;98-B(11):1450–1454. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.98B11.BJJ-2016-0194.R1.
    1. Law LM, Edirisinghe N, Wason JM. Use of an embedded, micro-randomised trial to investigate non-compliance in telehealth interventions. Clin Trials. 2016 Aug;13(4):417–24. doi: 10.1177/1740774516637075.
    1. Lyngå P, Fridlund B, Langius-Eklöf A, Bohm K. Perceptions of transmission of body weight and telemonitoring in patients with heart failure? Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2013;8:21524.
    1. Jonassaint CR, Shah N, Jonassaint J, De Castro L. Usability and feasibility of an mHealth intervention for monitoring and managing pain symptoms in sickle cell disease: the Sickle Cell Disease Mobile Application to Record Symptoms via Technology (SMART) Hemoglobin. 2015;39(3):162–8. doi: 10.3109/03630269.2015.1025141.
    1. Davis MM, Freeman M, Kaye J, Vuckovic N, Buckley DI. A systematic review of clinician and staff views on the acceptability of incorporating remote monitoring technology into primary care. Telemed J E Health. 2014 May;20(5):428–38. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2013.0166.
    1. Christiaens W, Van De Velde S, Bracke P. Pregnant women's fear of childbirth in midwife- and obstetrician-led care in Belgium and the Netherlands: test of the medicalization hypothesis. Women Health. 2011 May;51(3):220–39. doi: 10.1080/03630242.2011.560999.
    1. Johanson R, Newburn M, Macfarlane A. Has the medicalisation of childbirth gone too far? BMJ. 2002 Apr 13;324(7342):892–5.
    1. Kuo SC. [A gender perspective on medicalized childbirth] Hu Li Za Zhi. 2015 Feb;62(1):10–5.
    1. Parry DC. “We wanted a birth experience, not a medical experience”: exploring Canadian women’s use of midwifery. Health Care Women Int. 2008 Sep;29(8):784–806. doi: 10.1080/07399330802269451.
    1. Sedigh Mobarakabadi S, Mirzaei Najmabadi K, Ghazi Tabatabaie M. Ambivalence towards childbirth in a medicalized context: a qualitative inquiry among Iranian mothers. Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2015 Mar;17(3):e24262. doi: 10.5812/ircmj.24262.
    1. Shaw JCA. The medicalization of birth and midwifery as resistance. Health Care Women Int. 2013;34(6):522–36. doi: 10.1080/07399332.2012.736569.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe