Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30089606›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2018

A Web-Based Survey Assessing the Attitudes of Health Care Professionals in Germany Toward the Use of Telemedicine in Pregnancy Monitoring: Cross-Sectional Study.

Niklas Grassl, Juliane Nees, Katharina Schramm, Julia Spratte, Christof Sohn, Timm C Schott, Sarah Schott

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Person-Generated Health Data in Women's Health: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Niklas GrasslDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Women's Clinic Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7987-0444
Juliane NeesDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Women's Clinic Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4886-9808
Katharina SchrammDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Women's Clinic Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8670-4476
Julia SpratteDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Women's Clinic Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8277-8312
Christof SohnDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Women's Clinic Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9430-4037
Timm C SchottCentre of Dentistry, Department of Orthodontics and Orofacial Orthopedics, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1201-9222
Sarah SchottDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Women's Clinic Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1714-1147
University Hospital Heidelberg · DEUniversity of Tübingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe demand for fetal monitoring and constant reassurance is high in pregnant women. Consequently, pregnant women use various health apps and are more likely to visit emergency departments due to subjective but nonurgent complaints. However, electronic health (eHealth) and mobile health (mHealth) solutions are rarely used to prevent nonurgent emergency consultations. To implement modern care solutions, a better understanding of the attitudes, fears, and hopes of health care professionals toward eHealth and mHealth is needed.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate the attitudes of health care professionals in obstetrics toward telemedicine.

methodsA quantitative Web-based survey on health care professionals in obstetrics in Germany was conducted. The participants included nurses, midwives, and physicians of all age groups and job positions working in hospitals that provide various levels of health care. The questionnaire comprised 24 questions about the characteristics of the study population, views about emergency consultations in obstetrics, attitude toward telemedicine, job satisfaction, and sleeping behavior.

resultsIn total, 244 health care professionals participated in the Web-based survey. In general, health care professionals were skeptical (170/233, 72.9%) about the use of telemedicine in obstetrics; however, 55.8% (130/233) recognized its potential. Moreover, 72% (62/86) of physicians were optimistic in using apps for pregnancy monitoring, whereas 36.1% (47/130) of nonphysicians (P<.001) were not. Significantly, more nonphysicians rejected such developments (75/130, 57.7% rejected) compared with physicians (24/86, 28%; P<.001). We also found that obstetricians with more than 10 years of work-experience are more skeptical; however, approximately 49% (18/37) of them believed that telemedicine could reduce nonurgent emergency consultations, whereas 73.2% (106/145) of obstetricians with less than 5 years of experience (P=.01) thought otherwise. Our survey revealed a high job satisfaction and a prevalence of regular sleeping problems of 45.9% (91/198) among health care professionals in obstetrics. Surprisingly, both job satisfaction and sleeping problems were independent from the number of night shifts per month (P=.77 and P=.99, respectively). Yet, 56.6% (112/198) of the survey participants thought they would be happier with their job if they had to work fewer night shifts per month.

conclusionsOur study reveals an ambivalent attitude toward the use of telemedicine among health care professionals in obstetrics in Germany at the moment. Efforts to promote the use of telemedicine should focus on nurses and midwives because these groups are the most skeptical. By contrast, particularly young physicians recognize the potential of apps in patient care and would like to use such technology in pregnancy monitoring.

Indexed as

eHealthemergency consultationjob satisfactionnight shiftobstetricspregnancy monitoringsleeping problemstelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID30089606
PMCPMC6105866
OpenAlexW2809221751

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.