| Literature DB >> 27144393 |
Stephanie Felicie Victoria Sondaal1, Joyce Linda Browne1, Mary Amoakoh-Coleman1,2, Alexander Borgstein1, Andrea Solnes Miltenburg3, Mirjam Verwijs4,5, Kerstin Klipstein-Grobusch1,6.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Maternal and neonatal mortality remains high in many low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Availability and use of mobile phones is increasing rapidly with 90% of persons in developing countries having a mobile-cellular subscription. Mobile health (mHealth) interventions have been proposed as effective solutions to improve maternal and neonatal health. This systematic review assessed the effect of mHealth interventions that support pregnant women during the antenatal, birth and postnatal period in LMIC.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27144393 PMCID: PMC4856298 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154664
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Flow diagram.
Overview of scope of the studies (n = 27).
| Intervention studies (n = 12) | Descriptive studies (n = 15) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Result (n) | Result (%) | Result (n) | Result (%) |
| Africa | 5 | 42 | 7 | 47 |
| Asia | 6 | 50 | 3 | 20 |
| Middle-East | 1 | 8 | 2 | 13 |
| Europe | 0 | 0 | 1 | 7 |
| South-America | 0 | 0 | 2 | 13 |
| Rural | 5 | 42 | 3 | 20 |
| Urban | 5 | 42 | 4 | 27 |
| Both | 1 | 8 | 5 | 33 |
| Unclear | 1 | 8 | 3 | 20 |
| Unidirectional text (and voice) messaging | 6 | 50 | 5 | 33 |
| Direct two-way communication | 2 | 17 | 4 | 27 |
| Both unidirectional and direct two-way communication | 2 | 17 | 1 | 7 |
| Multidirectional text messaging | 1 | 8 | 1 | 7 |
| Unidirectional telephone counselling | 1 | 8 | 0 | 0 |
| Educational | 10 | 83 | 9 | 60 |
| Monitoring | 0 | 0 | 1 | 7 |
| Reminder | 7 | 58 | 6 | 40 |
| Communication and support | 2 | 17 | 4 | 27 |
| Emergency medical response system | 4 | 33 | 2 | 13 |
1Several studies used mHealth for multiple functions.
Fig 2Number of published records of mHealth studies (experimental (RCT and NRCT)) and descriptive) per year.
Characteristics and results of the intervention studies (n = 12).
| Study | Study characteristics | mHealth function | Form of mHealth | Maternal outcomes | Neonatal outcomes | Maternal and neonatal service utilization | Education on a healthy pregnancy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Khorshid et al. 2014 | No significant difference was found between groups regarding Hb, Hct and serum ferritin level before and after the intervention. / | NA | NA | NA | |||
| Lau et al. 2014 | NA | NA | NA | No statistical significant difference in score in any of the 9 questions between the intervention and control group. / Intervention group reported fairly healthy behaviours during pregnancy. | |||
| Lund et al. 2014 | NA | NA | NA | ||||
| Lund et al. (1) 2014 | NA | NA | NA | ||||
| Lund et al. 2012 | NA | NA | NA | ||||
| Ross et al. 2013 | Depressive symptoms amongst participants in the intervention group decreased significantly over time ( | NA | NA | NA | |||
| Tahir and Al-Sadat 2013 | NA | NA | NA | Exclusive breastfeeding 1st month postpartum: intervention group: 84.3%, control group: 74.7% (unadjusted OR, 1.83; p = 0.042). When adjusted for significant factors, the OR was not significant: 1.63 (95% CI, 0.822–3.22). | |||
| Jareethum et al. 2008 | No difference in pregnancy outcomes between the groups regarding foetal birth weight and preterm delivery. | NA | NA | ||||
| Datta et al. 2014 | NA | NA | NA | Significant increase in respondent's knowledge after the intervention with regards to: (95% CI) no. of TT injections to be received (0.17–0.42); min. no. of iron folic acid tablets to consume (0.21–0.46); min. no. of ANC visits during pregnancy (0.16–0.38); at least two danger signs during pregnancy (0.08–0.31); min. gap between two successive pregnancies (0.11–0.36); when to call a baby as “low birth weight” (0.12–0.35); age up to which to exclusively breastfeed (0.14–0.39); age to initiate complementary feeding (0.03–0.28). | |||
| Jalloh-Vos et al. | NA | NA | Intervention showed a significant positive net effect on | NA | |||
| Oyeyemi and Wynn 2014 | No significant difference between the project and the control area (OR = 1; 23 cases of maternal deaths in the project area compared to 29 cases in the control area). | NA | Facility utilization rate: significantly higher in project area than the control area (43.4% vs. 36.7%, | NA | |||
| Watkins (Chipatala Cha Pa Foni (CCPF)) | NA | NA | |||||
| Pathak | NA | NA | Among the 263 mothers, the first dose of BCG/HBV/OPV has a 95% rate, a second dose rate of 98%, and a third dose rate of 100%. Total vaccination rates at baseline were around 60%. | NA | |||
| Kaewkungwal et al. 2010 | NA | NA | NA |
Legend:
a: Found through grey literature search, RCT: randomized controlled trial, Hb: haemoglobin, Hct: haematocrit, OR: odds ratio, CI: confidence interval, NRCT: non-randomized controlled trial, HR: hazard ratio, ANC: antenatal care, IDI: in-depth interviews, SSI: semi-structured interviews, FGD: focus group discussion, MDR: maternal death reports, PHUR: peripheral health unit reports, PNC: post-natal care, TBA: traditional birth attendants, MCH: mother and child health, TT: tetanus toxoid, GA: gestational age, CES-D: Centre for Epidemiologic Studies Depression, EBF: exclusive breastfeeding, CUG: Closed-Users' Group, EPI: extended programme on immunization, BCG: Bacillus Calmette-Guérin, HBV: Hepatitis B vaccine, OPV: oral polio vaccine.
Characteristics and relevant findings of the descriptive studies (n = 15).
| Study | Study characteristics | mHealth function | Form of mHealth | Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GSMA mHealth | NA | NA | ||
| MAMA South Africa | Launched in May 2013. In May 2014 already 350.000 women registered. | |||
| BBC Media Action | NA | NA | ||
| Jennings et al. 2013 | NA | NA | ||
| MAMA Bangladesh | ||||
| MAMA Tanzania | ||||
| Cormick et al. 2012 | NA | NA | ||
| Dean et al. 2012 | ||||
| Diallo et al. 2012 | NA | |||
| Jankovic et al. 2012 | ||||
| JiVitA | ||||
| Kuo et al. 2012 | ||||
| MOTECH/ Grameen | ||||
| Osman et al. 2010 | ||||
| Parrilla-Rodríguez et al. 2001 |
Legend:
a: Found through grey literature search, BoP: bottom of pyramid, MNCH: maternal, neonatal and child health, RCT: randomized controlled trial, FGD: focus group discussion, IDI in-depth interview, CSBA: community based skilled providers, TBA: traditional birth attendant, MAMA: Mobile Alliance for Maternal Action, ANC: antenatal care visit, NA: not applicable, SI: structured interview, PMTCT: prevention of mother-to-child transmission, HIV: human immunodeficiency virus, SMS: short messaging service, CHW: community health worker.
SWOT analysis of the included intervention and descriptive studies (n = 27).
| Factors | Internal factors | External factors | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strengths | Weaknesses | Opportunities | Threats | |
| Providing information in lay terms [ | Lack of mobile phone ownership and/or sharing of phone with partner [ | Toll free mobile communication [ | Need for electricity for charging [ | |
| Low costs for user and implementer [ | High costs could limit widespread use [ | Using voice SMS to overcome illiteracy [ | Need for a functioning network [ | |
| Developed using locally-based software development expertise [ | Illiteracy with text-based messages [ | Increase reach to include women without mobile phone access by including women groups, traditional birth attendants or other figures at the community level [ | Distribution of phones may be necessary [ | |
| Voice SMS available for those who are illiterate [ | Accessibility lower amongst rural women or women of a lower socio-economic status [ | Feasibility study done prior to implementation informs optimization of access (especially for those at the bottom of the pyramid) [ | Rapid troubleshooting and maintenance needs to be available (D: [ | |
| Information available in different (local) languages [ | Absence of local fonts [ | Use of incentive schemes to increase recruitment (G: [ | Those at the bottom of the pyramid with a lack of dispensable income are not willing/able to pay for mHealth intervention (G: [ | |
| Can penetrate rural areas [ | Dependent on technical competency of user (G: [ | (Cultural) aspects that influence access to intervention (women's empowerment, decision making, confidentiality, the perception of difficulty of subscribing) (G: [ | ||
| Low mobile literacy (G: [ | ||||
| Regarded as supportive by pregnant women [ | Recipient fatigue when too many are sent [ | Integrated into existing healthcare system [ | Lack of privacy from family members [ | |
| Overcomes issue of lack of time amongst pregnant women [ | Involvement of the government to create supportive environments aligning with health guidelines (G: [ | Hesitation to participate because face-to-face interaction is regarded an important aspect of care [ | ||
| Accessible when convenient to the user [ | Feasibility studies prior to implementation can identify gaps and needs [ | External factors that limit women from following health guidelines (eg. breastfeeding exclusively up till a certain age, when women are also expected to return to work) [ | ||
| Facilitates quicker response in cases of emergency [ | Combination of mHealth forms [ | |||
| Can decrease the number of visits through mobile phone consultations (G: [ | Schedule message to avoid frustration from unpredictable messages (G: [ | |||
| Personalization of messages and linking information to experiences (G: [ | mHealth can support governments’ effort to register pregnant women (G: [ | |||
| Overcomes issue of difficulty with transportation [ | ||||
| Anonymity and remote access through mobile phones can help overcome stigma of HIV/AIDS (D: [ | ||||
| Mobile interventions are flexible, i.e. can be staggered according to period in pregnancy [ | Uncertainty whether information of message is received correctly [ | Combination of mHealth forms allowing different needs to be addressed [ | Privacy is not always guaranteed [ | |
| Simple mobile phone technology that is easy to use [ | Uncertainty whether message is received (G: [ | Question-answer system can provide more interaction when SMS messaging is used (G: [ | Dependent on donor funding, sustainability (G: [ | |
| Developing the intervention locally facilitates implementation as it builds on pre-existing knowledge of mobile phone use [ | Voice messages can be missed and are difficult to store for future reference (in comparison to SMS) (G: [ | Target audience represents a significant group (i.e. all pregnant women) which offers opportunities for advertising/revenue to be generated to make it sustainable (G: [ | ||
| Text limits prevent lengthy messages being sent [ | Text limits require skills to design useful health messages fitting the limit (G: [ | |||
| Durability of phones is not always sufficient (G: [ | ||||
Legend: Accessibility: What factors make an intervention accessible to a pregnant woman?; Acceptance: What factors make that the pregnant women enjoy/like/accept the intervention; Usability: What factors influence the usage of an intervention?; D: descriptive, indicating that the source(s) of the point belong(s) to the descriptive studies or studies; G: grey literature, indicating that the source(s) of the belong(s) to the grey literature studies.
Fig 3Summary of the overall risk assessment.
Quality assessment of intervention studies (n = 12).
| Study | Sequence generation | Allocation concealment | Blinding of researcher/ clinician | Selection of study population | Completeness of data | Origin of data (database of measurements) | Clear definition of outcome? | Confounders taken into account? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 Korshid et al. | ||||||||
| 2014 Lau et al. | ||||||||
| 2014 (1), 2014 (2) and 2012 Lund et al. | ||||||||
| 2013 Ross et al. | ||||||||
| 2013 Tahir and Al-Sadat | ||||||||
| 2008 Jareethum et al. | ||||||||
| 2014 Datta et al. | ||||||||
| 2014 Jalloh-Vos et al. | ||||||||
| 2014 Oyeyemi and Wynn | ||||||||
| 2013 Watkins et al. | ||||||||
| 2012 Pathak | ||||||||
| 2010 Kaewkungwal et al. |