Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Sep 27;19(9):e327.
doi: 10.2196/jmir.7266.

Effectiveness of Telemonitoring in Obstetrics: Scoping Review

Dorien Lanssens  1   2 , Thijs Vandenberk  1 , Inge M Thijs  1   3 , Lars Grieten  1 , Wilfried Gyselaers  1   2   3
Affiliations

Effectiveness of Telemonitoring in Obstetrics: Scoping Review

Dorien Lanssens et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: Despite reported positive results of telemonitoring effectiveness in various health care domains, this new technology is rarely used in prenatal care. A few isolated investigations were performed in the past years but with conflicting results.

Objective: The aim of this review was to (1) assess whether telemonitoring adds any substantial benefit to this patient population and (2) identify research gaps in this area to suggest goals for future research.

Methods: This review includes studies exploring the effectiveness of telemonitoring interventions for pregnant women reported in the English language. Due to the paucity of research in this area, all reports including uncontrolled nonrandomized and randomized controlled studies were selected.

Results: Fourteen studies, which performed their data collection from 1988 to 2010, met the inclusion criteria and were published from 1995 to present; four of the 14 published papers were multicenter randomized controlled trials (RCTs), five papers were single-center RCTs, three papers were retrospective studies, one paper was an observational study, and one paper was a qualitative study. Of the 14 papers, nine were available for a risk of bias assessment: three papers were classified as low risk, one as medium risk, and five as high risk. Furthermore, of those 14 papers, 13 focused on telemonitoring for maternal outcomes, and nine of the 14 papers focused on telemonitoring for fetal or neonatal outcomes. The studies reviewed report that telemonitoring can contribute to significant reductions in health care costs, (unscheduled) face-to-face visits, low neonatal birth weight, and admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), as well as prolonged gestational age and improved feelings of maternal satisfaction when compared with a control group. When only studies with low risk of bias were taken into account, the added value of telemonitoring became less pronounced: the only added value of telemonitoring is for pregnant women who transmitted their uterine activity by telecommunication. They had significant prolonged pregnancy survivals, and the newborns were less likely to be of low birth weight or to be admitted to the NICU. Following these results, telemonitoring can only be recommended by pregnant women at risk for preterm delivery. It is however important to consider that these studies were published in the mid-90s, which limits their direct applicability given the current technologies and practice.

Conclusions: This review shows that telemonitoring can be tentatively recommended for pregnant women at risk for preterm delivery. More recent RCTs with a blinded protocol are needed to strengthen the level of evidence around this topic and to have an insight in the added value of the technologies that are available nowadays. In addition, studies investigating patient satisfaction and economic effects in relation to telemonitoring are suggested for future research.

Keywords: fetal outcomes; maternal outcomes; obstetrics; review; telemonitoring.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this paper. This work was supported by Foundation Mustela (Laureate 2016).

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Selection procedure.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Number of publications during the last 25 years.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Becker S, Miron-Shatz T, Schumacher N, Krocza J, Diamantidis C, Albrecht UV. mHealth 2.0: experiences, possibilities, and perspectives. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2014;2(2):e24. doi: 10.2196/mhealth.3328. http://mhealth.jmir.org/2014/2/e24/ - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cruz J, Brooks D, Marques A. Home telemonitoring in COPD: a systematic review of methodologies and patients' adherence. Int J Med Inform. 2014 Apr;83(4):249–63. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.01.008. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Odibo IN, Wendel PJ, Magann EF. Telemedicine in obstetrics. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Sep;56(3):422–33. doi: 10.1097/GRF.0b013e318290fef0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cowie MR, Lobos AA. Telemonitoring for patients with heart failure. CMAJ. 2012 Mar 20;184(5):509–10. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.101456. http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=21464164 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kitsiou S, Paré G, Jaana M. Effects of home telemonitoring interventions on patients with chronic heart failure: an overview of systematic reviews. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17(3):e63. doi: 10.2196/jmir.4174. http://www.jmir.org/2015/3/e63/ - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources