Literature DB >> 35726912

Evaluating the level of patient satisfaction with telehealth antenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic at King Abdul-Aziz Medical City, Primary Health Care Center, Specialized Polyclinic.

Razaz Wali1,2,3, Amani Alhakami1, Nada Alsafari1.   

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate the client satisfaction with a phone-based antenatal care consultation and identify the associated factors during the COVID-19 pandemic at King Abdul-Aziz Medical City, Primary Health Care Center Specialized Polyclinic during 2020.
METHOD: The study was a cross-sectional, retrospective study conducted with pregnant women attending the maternity clinic at the Specialized Polyclinic, Primary Health Care Center at King Abdul-Aziz Medical City, Jeddah. A self-administered questionnaire was sent via a text message (short message service) to collect the data after signed written consent. RESULT: Of 279 pregnant women, 262 (93.9%) attended phone clinic appointments one to five times. The total satisfaction level score was 73.4 ± 6.5, indicating a high level of satisfaction with the phone clinics, and 252 (90.3%) reported a high level of satisfaction. There was a significant difference in the total score regarding education, occupation, husband's occupation, smoking, gravidity, parity, menstruation, gestational age, pregnancy complication, number of phone clinics during pregnancy, number of attending clinics during pregnancy, visiting another health facility, and reason of visiting phone clinic (p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001, p = 0.015, p = 0.033, p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001, p = 0.027, p = 0.001, p < 0.0001, and p = 0.002).
CONCLUSION: The study indicated a high level of satisfaction with the antenatal telephone clinics during the pandemic, which supports the trend of transition in the direction of the digitalization of antenatal care.

Entities:  

Keywords:  COVID-19 pandemic; antenatal care; family medicine; patient satisfaction; telehealth; virtual

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35726912      PMCID: PMC9218447          DOI: 10.1177/17455057221104659

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Womens Health (Lond)        ISSN: 1745-5057


Introduction

Antenatal care (ANC) can be defined as “the care provided by skilled healthcare professionals to pregnant women to ensure the best health conditions for both mother and baby during pregnancy.”[1,2] During these visits, various health services are done, including health promotion, screening, diagnosis, and disease prevention.[1,2] With each visit, the patient’s medical history, physical examination, ordering required investigations, appropriate supplements, and medication should be assessed. In a low-risk pregnancy, primary health care is considered the first point of care that the client needs. At the King Abdul-Aziz Medical City, Primary Health Care Center (KAMC-PHC), ANC follows a shared care protocol with the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology for low-risk pregnancy. The protocol adheres to the recommendation by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), which consists of 12–14 visits. The clients are seen in-person monthly from weeks 8 to 28, then biweekly from weeks 28 to 36, and referred to the obstetrician at 36 weeks to be seen weekly until delivery.[3,4] In the recent pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), health care systems were disrupted globally.[5 –7] In Saudi Arabia, there was a complete lockdown for infection control purposes and overloading concerns. Caring for clients was challenging, especially for a vulnerable group such as pregnant women. Telemedicine and virtual clinics were crucial elements to maintaining continuity of care throughout this crisis.[8 –10] Telemedicine refers to the care delivered to the patient through a phone-based consultation without direct physical contact with the health care system. Telehealth and telemedicine are used interchangeably; they cover a wide range of digital care services, including video consultations, mobile phone consultations, and phone-based consultations. The last include the delivery of health services through phone calls.[11,12] However, in the United States, it has been used for many years to provide obstetric care, especially in rural areas. In Saudi Arabia, a university hospital has been using the WhatsApp application for the past few months to facilitate communication and address non-urgent situations. The most appropriate intervention to deliver health care services in Saudi Arabia during the pandemic was social distancing. The care was shifted totally from a physical to a phone base consultation. This shift in care occurred in most countries, such as Australia and Scotland. To support this, the Pregnancy and COVID-19: Saudi Society of Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SSMFM) guideline encouraged reducing the number of physical antenatal visits in low-risk populations to minimize exposure. At KAMC-PHC, ANC was delivered through a phone-based consultation by qualified family medicine physicians focused on promoting access and providing optimum care to pregnant women. All the pregnant women were booked through patient registration and given appointments according to risk factors. A special electronic form was completed. During these consultations, the clients were contacted through the registered phone number and asked about their complaints, fetal movement, vaginal bleeding, and other red flags. Investigations and obstetric ultrasound results were discussed as well. Prenatal supplements and medication were prescribed if necessary. Client satisfaction is a significant indicator of the quality of care delivered during this pandemic. Evaluating of client satisfaction clinically matters for both health care providers and the health organization to ensure the effectiveness of the care and for the patients. As highlighted in the literature, satisfied clients are more likely to have a favorable outcome, adhere to the treatment plan, be involved with their care, and build trust with the health care system. To our best knowledge, there are no local studies in Saudi Arabia addressing client satisfaction and the emergence of phone-based consultation in the antenatal clinic. The study aimed to evaluate client satisfaction with antenatal phone-based consultation and detect the associated factors during the COVID-19 pandemic at KAMC-PHC Specialized Polyclinic from April to August 2020.

Materials and methods

The study was a cross-sectional, retrospective study conducted with the pregnant women attending the maternity clinic at the specialized polyclinic. The total number of pregnant women attending ANC from April to August 2020 was 1000. The required sample size was 278 using the Raosoft software at a 95% confidence interval (CI) level with a 50% response distribution and a margin of error of ±5%. The Ethical Committee approval by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) was obtained with reference number (RJ20/148/J), individual written consent was obtained, and the data were kept confidential. The list of clients booked in the maternity clinic was used for randomization. Manual systematic randomization was used to reduce bias; number 3 was the starting point, and then every second patient was included. A self-administered questionnaire using Google Forms was sent via a text message (SMS) to the sample. On the first page of the form, there is the consent form which is mandatory to complete before they can proceed to the next section. They could open the link, answer the questions, and submit the final response. Only low-risk pregnant women were included in this study who attended at least one phone-based consultation visit. High-risk pregnancies and those who did not attend any phone-based consultation were excluded. The questionnaire was adapted from the literature.[3,17] It was in English and Arabic and consisted of three parts: Demographic data (independent variables): age, education level, marital status, occupation, monthly income, number of children, smoking, and exercise. Obstetric information (independent variables): gestational age (GA), gravidity, parity, abortion, and chronic illness. Satisfaction domains (dependent variables): scheduling, technology, equipment/technical issues, clinical assessment and provider, personal, general, and overall. A pilot study was conducted with 20 pregnant women to test the questionnaire’s feasibility and applicability. The participants in the pilot study were not included in the actual research.

Statistical analysis

The data were entered and analyzed with IBM SPSS statistical software package version 21. For the qualitative variables, frequency and percentage were used for the description, and a mean value with standard deviation for the descriptive of quantitative variables and the level of satisfaction score. An independent t-test and a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test were used to compare continuous variables. Statistical significance was considered at p-value < 0.05 and a confidence interval of 95% CI.

Results

Of the sample of 279, 142 (50.9%) were from 20 to 30 years, 261 (93.5%) were housewives, 192 (68.8%) were indirect smokers, and 256 (91.8%) had a monthly income from 5000 to 15,000 Saudi Riyal (Table 1). Almost a third of the cases (31.5%, n = 88) had their first pregnancy, and 99 (35.5%) reported two to three previous pregnancies, 113 (40.6%) reported one to two previous delivery, 205 (73.5%) reported no abortion, 173 (62.0%) were in the second semester, and 88 (31.5%) were in the third semester, and 178 (63.8%) had one to five children. Only 17 (6.1%) had a chronic illness, and 9 (3.2%) had complications during pregnancy. The majority (93.9%, n = 262) attended the phone clinic appointments between one and five times, 246 (88.2%) had physical visits between one and five times, and 180 (64.5%) visited another health facility between one and five times. The main reason (88.9%, n = 266) for having a phone clinic was “Mandatory from the health facility” (Table 2).
Table 1.

The study client’s demographic data.

Variable N %
Age (years)20–3014250.9
Less than 20165.7
More than 3012143.4
EducationElementary, intermediate, high school21777.8
University, postgraduate5820.8
Illiterate41.4
OccupationStudent51.8
Housewife26193.5
Employee134.7
Husband’s occupationStudent31.1
Military10.4
Retired145.0
Employee26193.5
SmokingNo8530.5
Ex-smoker10.4
Indirect smoker (in contact with smokers)19268.8
Yes10.4
Monthly income (Saudi Riyal)5000–15,000227.9
Less than 500025691.8
More than 15,00010.4
Table 2.

The study client’s medical history.

Variable N %
Gravidity2–39935.5
4–55419.4
More than 53813.6
First time pregnant8831.5
Abortion1–26322.6
3–593.2
More than 520.7
Non20573.5
MenstruationNo103.6
Yes26996.4
Kids numberMore than 5155.4
Non8630.8
1–517863.8
Pregnancy complicationPregnancy poisoning10.4
GDM82.8
Nothing27096.8
Number of phone clinics during pregnancyMore than 572.5
Non103.6
1–526293.9
Number of attending clinics during pregnancyMore than 520.7
Non3111.1
1–524688.2
Parity1–211340.6
3–56724.0
More than 5113.9
Non8831.5
GA (weeks)From the first month to the third month (1–12 weeks)134.7
From the fourth month to the sixth month (13–28 weeks)17362.0
From the seventh month to the ninth month (29–40 weeks)8831.5
After delivery51.8
Chronic illness (1)Yes176.1
No26293.9
Chronic illness (2) a HTN631.6
DM315.7
Lupus210.5
Asthma15.3
Hypothyroidism631.6
HBV15.3
Visiting another health facilityNon9935.5
1–518064.5
Reason for visiting phone clinic a Pandemic lockout and curfew41.3
Fear of transmitting infection279.1
Lack of transportation20.7
Mandatory from the health facility26688.9

GA: gestational age; GDM: gestational diabetes mellitus; HTN: hypertension; HBV: hepatitis B virus.

Multiple responses.

The study client’s demographic data. The study client’s medical history. GA: gestational age; GDM: gestational diabetes mellitus; HTN: hypertension; HBV: hepatitis B virus. Multiple responses. The main items to measure satisfaction were as follows: 276 (98.9%) “The quality of the call is good, and the voice was clear,” followed by 274 (98.2%) “Keeping privacy during the clinic call” and “Doctor’s behavior” equally, then 273 (97.8%) “Your doctor’s knowledge of your health,” 269 (96.4%) “Doctor’s interest in your questions and fears,” “Meet all your needs during the phone clinic,” and “Satisfaction with the telephone clinic during pregnancy follow-up” equally. Most of the participants, 266 (95.3%), reported “continue the pregnancy at this facility,” and 203 (72.7%) reported, “Recommend a telephone clinic to others during pregnancy follow-up.” (Table 3). The total level of satisfaction score was 73.4 ± 6.5, indicating a high level of satisfaction with the phone clinic, and 252 (90.3%) reported a high level of satisfaction (Figure 1 and Table 4).
Table 3.

The study client’s level of satisfaction with telehealth antenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Variable N %
Easy to have an appointmentStrongly dissatisfied and dissatisfied5118.2
Strongly satisfied and satisfied22881.7
Number of physician visits during pregnancyStrongly dissatisfied and dissatisfied155.4
Strongly satisfied and satisfied26494.6
Starting at the exact time of the appointmentStrongly dissatisfied and dissatisfied207.2
Strongly satisfied and satisfied25992.8
Satisfied with the time of the next appointmentStrongly dissatisfied and dissatisfied176.1
Strongly satisfied and satisfied26293.9
Doctor’s knowledge of your healthStrongly dissatisfied and dissatisfied62.2
Strongly satisfied and satisfied27397.8
Consultation timeStrongly dissatisfied and dissatisfied134.6
Strongly satisfied and satisfied26695.4
Doctor’s interest in questions and fearsStrongly dissatisfied and dissatisfied41.5
Neutral62.2
Strongly satisfied and satisfied26996.3
General evaluation of the providing servicesStrongly dissatisfied and dissatisfied41.5
Neutral72.5
Strongly satisfied and satisfied26396.0
Easy to call the clinic’s phoneStrongly dissatisfied and dissatisfied165.8
Strongly satisfied and satisfied26394.2
The quality of the call was good, and the voice was clearStrongly dissatisfied and dissatisfied31.1
Strongly satisfied and satisfied27698.9
The doctor’s role is clearStrongly dissatisfied and dissatisfied5218.6
Strongly satisfied and satisfied22781.4
Doctor’s behaviorStrongly dissatisfied and dissatisfied51.8
Strongly satisfied and satisfied27498.2
Meet all your needs during the phone clinicStrongly dissatisfied and dissatisfied103.6
Strongly satisfied and satisfied26996.4
Responding to concerns during the phone clinicStrongly dissatisfied and dissatisfied113.9
Strongly satisfied and satisfied26896.1
Keeping privacy during the clinic callStrongly dissatisfied and dissatisfied51.8
Strongly satisfied and satisfied27498.2
Satisfaction with the telephone clinic during pregnancy follow-upStrongly dissatisfied and dissatisfied51.8
Neutral51.8
Strongly satisfied and satisfied27196.4
How likely is it that you will continue your pregnancy at this facility?Too low and low41.5
Neutral93.2
Too much and much26695.3
How likely are you to recommend a telephone clinic to others during pregnancy follow-upToo low and low51.8
Neutral7125.4
Too much and much20372.7
Figure 1.

Satisfaction level category.

Table 4.

The study client’s satisfactory level with telehealth antenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic score.

VariableMean ± SDRange (minimum to maximum)
Total score73.4 ± 6.5(34–95)
Variable N %
Satisfaction level category
Poor113.9
Moderate165.7
High25290.3

SD: standard deviation.

The study client’s level of satisfaction with telehealth antenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study client’s satisfactory level with telehealth antenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic score. SD: standard deviation. Satisfaction level category. The result showed a significant difference between the total score for education, occupation, husband’s occupation, and smoking. The group with a lower education, were housewives, and those whose husbands were retired had a significantly higher score than others (p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001, and p < 0.0001). However, there was no significant difference in the age and monthly income score (Table 5). There was a significant difference between the total score and gravidity, parity, menstruation, GA, pregnancy complication, number of phone clinics during pregnancy, number of attending clinics during pregnancy, visiting another health facility, and reason for visiting phone clinic. The groups who have been pregnant more than five times (95% CI = −5.056 to −1.521, p < 0.0001), delivered more than five times (95% CI = −5.056 to −1.521, p < 0.0001), menstruated (95% CI = −5.056 to −1.521, p < 0.0001), in the second semester (95% CI = −5.056 to −1.521, p < 0.0001), who had pregnancy complications (95% CI = −5.056 to −1.521, p < 0.0001), who had more than five phone clinic visits (95% CI = −5.056 to −1.521, p < 0.0001), who visited the clinic more than five times, who had visited another health facility, and who were fearful of transmitting infection had a significantly higher score than others (p = 0.015, p = 0.033, p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001, p = 0.027, p = 0.001, p < 0.0001, and p = 0.002). There was no significant difference in the total score regarding abortion, chronic illness, and the number of children (Table 6).
Table 5.

The relation between the study client’s satisfaction level with telehealth antenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic and demographic data.

VariableMeanSDp-value95% confidence interval
Lower boundUpper bound
Age (years)20–3073.08456.269920.10872.044374.1247
Less than 2070.812513.7754363.472178.1529
More than 3074.14055.1321073.216875.0642
EducationElementary, intermediate, high school74.17053.505740.0001**73.701474.6396
University, postgraduate71.32769.6870168.780573.8747
Illiterate62.500030.9892513.1892111.8108
OccupationStudent52.400023.649520.0001**23.035281.7648
Housewife73.93874.7761573.356674.5208
Employee70.923110.0371164.857776.9884
Husband’s occupationStudent51.666727.135460.0001**−15.7416119.0749
Military65.0000
Retired75.42865.9058572.018678.8385
Employee73.58625.6355072.899374.2731
SmokingNo71.623510.806720.0001**69.292673.9545
Ex-smoker95.0000
Indirect smoker (in contact with smokers)74.09382.4001773.752174.4354
Yes73.0000
Monthly income (Saudi Riyal)5000–15,00073.636411.495530.91068.539578.7332
Less than 500073.38285.9258472.653474.1122
More than 15,00076.0000

SD: standard deviation.

Table 6.

The relation between the study client’s satisfaction level with telehealth antenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic and medical history.

VariableMeanSDp-value95% confidence interval
Lower boundUpper bound
Gravidity2–373.03065.917740.015*71.844274.2170
4–574.35191.7500173.874274.8295
More than 575.78956.2909573.721777.8573
First time pregnant72.12508.4415770.336473.9136
Parity1–273.26795.925940.033*72.158374.3774
3–573.88065.0287772.654075.1072
More than 578.27278.3915572.635283.9103
Non72.52277.6021470.912074.1335
Abortion1–274.01615.649580.42172.581475.4509
3–574.77787.6775368.876380.6792
More than 576.00000.0000076.000076.0000
Non73.09766.6987272.175174.0200
MenstruationNo60.142919.802600.0001**41.828578.4572
Yes74.00004.3913173.472974.5271
GA (weeks)From the first month to the third month (1–12 weeks)69.000014.955490.0001**59.962578.0375
From the fourth month to the sixth month (13–28 weeks)73.72834.6419773.031774.4249
From the seventh month to the ninth month (29–40 weeks)74.82953.8183574.020575.6386
After delivery49.000012.7671533.147564.8525
Kids numberMore than 576.80007.532790.06672.628580.9715
Non72.61637.7644370.951674.2810
1–573.51125.6200272.679974.3425
Chronic illness (1)No73.59925.798310.05972.893974.3046
Yes70.529413.2576363.713077.3459
Pregnancy complicationNo73.25566.455850.027*72.482074.0291
Yes78.11116.3333373.242982.9793
Number of phone clinics during pregnancyMore than 580.571415.240920.001*66.475994.6669
Non68.400017.2575356.054780.7453
1–573.41225.1985472.779874.0446
Number of attended clinics during pregnancyMore than 584.000015.556350.0001**−55.7683223.7683
Non69.806511.4380065.611074.0019
1–573.78055.3108173.113574.4474
Visiting another health facilityNon72.16168.355260.017*70.495273.8280
1–574.10005.1002273.349974.8501
Reason for visiting phone clinicPandemic lockout and curfew60.50006.363960.002*3.3221117.6779
Fear of transmitting infection75.30001.3374974.343276.2568
Lack of transportation73.31251.5370472.493574.1315
Mandatory from the health facility73.35226.6210972.522474.1820

SD: standard deviation.

: significant assosiation.

The relation between the study client’s satisfaction level with telehealth antenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic and demographic data. SD: standard deviation. The relation between the study client’s satisfaction level with telehealth antenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic and medical history. SD: standard deviation. : significant assosiation. Regarding the study client’s satisfaction level, the multilinear regression model (enter) was statistically significant in prediction. The significant independent predictors for higher level of client’s satisfaction include educational level (95% CI = −5.056 to −1.521, p < 0.0001), having menstruation (95% CI = −11.864 to 20.007, p < 0.0001), the semester (95% CI = −2.744 to −0.452, p = 0.006), previous illness (95% CI = −2.665 to 10.117, p = 0.001), and phone clinic visit (95% CI = −5.746 to −0.095, p < 0.0001), where F = 8.445, p < 0.0001, R  = 0.225, and adjusted R  = 0.174 (Table 7).
Table 7.

Multilinear regression for potentially predictive factors of the study client’s satisfaction level with telehealth antenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The study client’s satisfaction levelUnstandardized coefficientsStandardized coefficientsp-value95% CI for odds ratio
B β LowerUpper
(Constant)67.0540.00052.44681.661
Age0.1090.0160.774−0.6380.856
Education−3.288−0.2320.000−5.056−1.521
Occupation−3.027−0.1180.129−6.9400.887
Husband occupation−2.057−0.1240.090−4.4350.321
Smoking0.3420.0490.387−0.4351.119
Monthly income−2.344−0.1000.173−5.7221.034
Gravidity−0.361−0.0960.437−1.2740.552
Parity−0.189−0.0510.726−1.2520.873
Abortion−0.100−0.0260.651−0.5320.333
Menstruation15.9360.6310.00011.86420.007
Semester−1.598−0.1440.006−2.744−0.452
Children number−1.301−0.1190.148−3.0660.464
Chronic illness−1.937−0.0710.195−4.8710.997
Previous illness6.3910.1740.0012.66510.117
Phone clinic visit−3.772−0.2090.000−5.746−1.797
Physical clinic visit0.5640.0310.588−1.4832.612
Another health facility visit1.0590.0780.164−0.4362.553
Visit reason−0.758−0.0810.117−1.7080.191
R2 = 0.225Adjusted R2 = 0.174

CI: confidence interval.

Multilinear regression for potentially predictive factors of the study client’s satisfaction level with telehealth antenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic. CI: confidence interval.

Discussion

Phone-based consultation has been used for decades to deliver medical care. Formerly, it has been used to reach rural areas and provide medical care to patients remotely with satisfactory results. Telemedicine technology is becoming more accessible, affordable, and routinely used by clinicians and patients. The COVID-19 pandemic has been an essential examination of the robustness of virtual care models applied in primary care.[18 –21] This study showed that most pregnant women had a high level of satisfaction with the phone clinics, as 252 (90.3%) reported a high level of satisfaction. Several studies reported a high level of satisfaction with phone clinics by pregnant women. In the United Kingdom, the study by Quinn et al. reported that 86% rated their experience as good or very good. Liu et al. reported that women stated being very or extremely satisfied (27.9%) or moderately satisfied (43.5%) with their virtual prenatal experiences. Peahl et al. reported that 77.5% of women were satisfied with doing virtual visits. Pflugeisen and Mou also reported high satisfaction with virtual care. Historically, women’s acceptance of virtual care has been limited due to concerns about lack of perceived support and the long gaps between in-person visits. However, a shift in practice with the pandemic has allowed increased capture of a wider proportion of women’s preferences.[21-25] Holcomb et al. reported high client satisfaction with audio-only virtual ANC during the COVID-19 pandemic, demonstrating that 99% of women felt their needs were met with virtual care and compliance with virtual clinics. In an integrative review, the authors reported that patient satisfaction and confidence in the care provided were consistently rated high, as identified through interviews and surveys covering several domains, including the ease of scheduling, interactions with health care providers, technology, and personal benefits.[26 –33] Patients indicated the time and cost reductions associated with not requiring to take time off work, organize childcare, or get transportation, consistent in rural and urban settings.[26 –33] This result showed that the high satisfaction levels of pregnant women regarding phone clinics are common and have been reported by several studies. The response to the phone-based consultation was higher in the group in their second or third trimester or having more than one child. This is similar to other studies, and it could be related to previous pregnancy experience and other reassuring signs, such as fetal movement or a similar experience with pregnancy symptoms in the first trimester, which increased the satisfaction rate. The study findings indicated that phone-based antenatal clinics were acceptable to all the patients surveyed, with significant differences regarding sociodemographic and obstetric data. In addition, the women would recommend such visits to others, which may be related to safety and decrease the time needed for physical visits and the need for transportation. Several studies reported a similar result where safety and saving time, and availability of transportation were the main reason for the perceived high level of satisfaction. Holcomb et al. reported that the 88% compliance with virtual clinics was significantly higher than with in-person appointments (82%; p < 0.001). A cross-sectional study by Futterman et al. compared virtual with in-person appointments and found a high level of satisfaction with both, although in-person satisfaction was significantly higher. The sample agreed that they would continue to follow up the same way, and they would recommend this service to other pregnant women, similar to a Pakistani study. Aziz et al. stated the importance of joining face-to-face and telemedicine approaches for high-risk pregnancies during the pandemic. We must ensure the adoption of telemedicine strategies that do not compromise feto-maternal outcomes. A randomized controlled trial by Butler Tobah et al. compared alternative virtual prenatal care with usual face-to-face care and reported that women had higher levels of satisfaction and less stress with the virtual care arm, with no difference in feto-maternal outcomes or perceived quality of care. Overall, the high level of satisfaction with the phone-based ANC reported in the study demonstrated the importance of redesigning the delivery of health care and accommodating technology-based care in emergencies and as part of regular care. It requires more time in management, training, and adoption of such services in the future.

Limitations of the study

The main limitation of this study is the absence of comparison to other modalities of health care services, fetal and maternal outcomes, and the medicolegal aspects of such a service. This can limit the generalization of the results of this study. Another limitation is the mandatory use of this service during the epidemic, as there was no other option to receive the care, which could increase the satisfaction compared with no care at all.

Implications for practice and research

This study indicated that women with a low risk were satisfied in all aspects of a phone-based consultation; it is a good opportunity for policymakers and health care organizations to review the current recommendations, cost-effectiveness, medicolegal aspects, and protocols in managing such cases. This study also calls for more detailed studies in a broader population, including a qualitative approach to highlight what could be added to the current telehealth care services from the patient’s point of view. This study was done early during the COVID-19 pandemic. Studies would be needed to explore the absolute need for technology-based services to deliver other health care services in emergencies and as part of routine health care.

Conclusion

The study indicates that the most pregnant women were satisfied with receiving care via a phone-based antenatal service during the COVID-19 pandemic. It also supports potential changes to models of care that incorporate the use of telehealth. Despite sociodemographic differences, women have widely accepted virtual antenatal clinics, supporting the feasibility of virtual clinics moving forward. The study supports the combination of virtual antenatal clinics besides face-to-face delivery of care as and where convenient to ensure delivery of patient-centered care; additional exploring studies to discover suitable telemedicine strategies that aim to personalize care for pregnant women are required. For future ANC delivery, it is suggested to integrate both technology-based health care with physical attendance to ensure high-quality, evidence-based health care, and the cost-effectiveness and medicolegal aspects of the services should be measured.
  28 in total

1.  Randomized comparison of a reduced-visit prenatal care model enhanced with remote monitoring.

Authors:  Yvonne S Butler Tobah; Annie LeBlanc; Megan E Branda; Jonathan W Inselman; Megan A Morris; Jennifer L Ridgeway; Dawn M Finnie; Regan Theiler; Vanessa E Torbenson; Ellen M Brodrick; Marnie Meylor de Mooij; Bobbie Gostout; Abimbola Famuyide
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2019-06-19       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  Acceptability of Virtual Prenatal Visits for Women with Gestational Diabetes.

Authors:  Teresa N Harrison; David A Sacks; Carly Parry; Mayra Macias; Deborah S Ling Grant; Jean M Lawrence
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2017-01-30

3.  Doctor-patient communication: a review.

Authors:  Jennifer Fong Ha; Nancy Longnecker
Journal:  Ochsner J       Date:  2010

4.  A randomised controlled trial comparing two schedules of antenatal visits: the antenatal care project.

Authors:  J Sikorski; J Wilson; S Clement; S Das; N Smeeton
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-03-02

Review 5.  Virtual Visits in Prenatal Care: An Integrative Review.

Authors:  Katrina K Wu; Cristina Lopez; Michelle Nichols
Journal:  J Midwifery Womens Health       Date:  2021-11-12       Impact factor: 2.388

6.  Patient Perspectives on Audio-Only Virtual Prenatal Visits Amidst the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Pandemic.

Authors:  Denisse Holcomb; Mary Ann Faucher; Jennifer Bouzid; Marjorie Quint-Bouzid; David B Nelson; Elaine Duryea
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 7.661

7.  Virtual health care in the era of COVID-19.

Authors:  Paul Webster
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2020-04-11       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Optimizing your telemedicine visit during the COVID-19 pandemic: Practice guidelines for patients with head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Aman Prasad; Ryan Brewster; Jason G Newman; Karthik Rajasekaran
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 3.147

9.  Patient and provider perspectives of a new prenatal care model introduced in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Authors:  Alex F Peahl; Allison Powell; Hanna Berlin; Roger D Smith; Elizabeth Krans; Jennifer Waljee; Vanessa K Dalton; Michele Heisler; Michelle H Moniz
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2020-10-08       Impact factor: 8.661

10.  Telehealth for High-Risk Pregnancies in the Setting of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Aleha Aziz; Noelia Zork; Janice J Aubey; Caitlin D Baptiste; Mary E D'Alton; Ukachi N Emeruwa; Karin M Fuchs; Dena Goffman; Cynthia Gyamfi-Bannerman; Jennifer H Haythe; Anita P LaSala; Nigel Madden; Eliza C Miller; Russell S Miller; Catherine Monk; Leslie Moroz; Samsiya Ona; Laurence E Ring; Jean-Ju Sheen; Erica S Spiegel; Lynn L Simpson; Hope S Yates; Alexander M Friedman
Journal:  Am J Perinatol       Date:  2020-05-12       Impact factor: 1.862

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.