Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: Apr 26, 2018
Open Peer Review Period: Apr 27, 2018 - Jun 22, 2018
Date Accepted: Dec 31, 2018
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

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

Lanssens D, Vandenberk T, Lodewijckx J, Peeters T, Storms V, Thijs IM, Grieten L, Gyselaers W

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

J Med Internet Res 2019;21(4):e10887

DOI: 10.2196/10887

PMID: 30985286

PMCID: 6487343

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

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

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.

ClinicalTrial:

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03246737; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03246737 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/76KVnHSYY)


 Citation

Please cite as:

Lanssens D, Vandenberk T, Lodewijckx J, Peeters T, Storms V, Thijs IM, Grieten L, Gyselaers W

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

J Med Internet Res 2019;21(4):e10887

DOI: 10.2196/10887

PMID: 30985286

PMCID: 6487343

Per the author's request the PDF is not available.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.