Accepted for/Published in: JMIR mHealth and uHealth
Date Submitted: Aug 5, 2018
Open Peer Review Period: Aug 9, 2018 - Oct 4, 2018
Date Accepted: Mar 4, 2019
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited.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.
Patients’ and Doctors’ Perceptions of a Mobile Phone–Based Consultation Service for Maternal, Neonatal, and Infant Health Care in Bangladesh: A Mixed-Methods Study
Background:
A mobile-based consultation service, or telehealth, can be used for remote consultations with health care professionals for screening, self-care management, and referral. In rural Bangladesh, where there is high demand for scarce male and even scarcer female doctors, remote consultations may help women seeking maternal and child health care. Aponjon is a mHealth service in Bangladesh that provides weekly voice or text messages to pregnant women, new mothers, and family members on various aspects of maternal, neonatal, and infant health. Subscribers can also access a dedicated 24*7 call center to discuss maternal, neonatal, and infant health or emergencies with medically trained doctors. The service provides advice, primary diagnoses, prescriptions, and referrals to subscriber callers.
Objective:
We investigated the Aponjon service to understand access, acceptability, usability, benefits, and challenges of a mobile phone-based consultation service.
Methods:
We conducted call log data analysis for September to November 2015 to understand how many unique subscribers accessed the service, who accessed the service, the geographical distribution of callers, and the purpose of the calls. We also conducted a qualitative exploratory substudy of eight married women and eight married men who were subscribers to and accessed the service during this time to understand their experiences. We interviewed 11 doctors from the same service who provided phone consultations to subscribers.
Results:
Approximately 3894 unique subscribers accessed the service for single or multiple consultations during the study period; 68.36% (2662/3894) of subscribers were from rural households, and 53.00% (2064/3894) of calls were made by pregnant women or new mothers. Approximately 96.08% (5081/5288) calls were nonurgent, 2.69% (142/5288) semiurgent, and 1.23% (65/5288) urgent. Almost 64.7% (134/207) semiurgent or urgent calls came between 8 PM and 8 AM. Callers found the consultation service trustworthy, cost-effective, and convenient. The doctors dispelled misconceptions and promoted good health care practices, regular health check-ups, and responsible use of medicine. They helped families understand the severity of sicknesses and advised them to seek care at health facilities for semiurgent or urgent conditions. The service lacked a pro-poor policy to support talk times of subscribers from poor households and a proper referral system to help patients find the right care at the right facilities.
Conclusions:
Although a regular messaging service is constrained by a one-way communication system, this service using the same platform, gave subscribers access to an abbreviated “consultation” with medical doctors. The consultations provided subscribers with valued medical advice and support, although they were limited in their population reach and their integration into the wider medical system. Further research is required to understand the impact of advice and referral, cost-effectiveness, and willingness to pay for mHealth consultation services, but this research suggests that these services should be supported or even expanded.
Citation
Per the author's request the PDF is not available.
Copyright
© 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.