Trial reportBMC pregnancy and childbirth2021
OB Nest randomized controlled trial: a cost comparison of reduced visit compared to traditional prenatal care.
Trial report in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02082275 (Implementation and Evaluation of the OB Nest Project at the Point of Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Implementation and Evaluation of the OB Nest Project at the Point of Care: Redefining Continuity of Care for Expectant Mothers.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Application of eHealth in Symptom Management of Patients With Breast Cancer During Endocrine Therapy: Scoping Literature Review.JMIR cancer · 2026Article
- Clinician continuity during pregnancy care: A mixed methods study.Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Virtual-Based Prenatal Care Methods and Their Reported Outcomes-A Scoping Review.Health science reports · 2025Review
- Perinatal Outcomes Among Patients Using OB Teleflex, A Hybrid Prenatal Telemedicine Program.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada : JOGC = Journal d'obstetrique et gynecologie du Canada : JOGC · 2025Article
- Optimising digital clinical consultations in maternity care: a realist review and implementation principles.BMJ open · 2024Review
- A cost-minimisation population-based analysis of telehealth-integrated antenatal care.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2024Article
- Telehealth in antenatal care: recent insights and advances.BMC medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTraditional prenatal care includes up to 13 in person office visits, and the cost of this care is not well-described. Alternative models are being explored to better meet the needs of patients and providers. OB Nest is a telemedicine-enhanced program with a reduced frequency of in-person prenatal visits. The cost implications of connected care services added to prenatal care packages are unclear.
methodsUsing data from the OB Nest randomized, controlled trial we analyzed the provider and staff time associated with prenatal care in the traditional and OB Nest models. Fewer visits were required for OB Nest, but given the compensatory increase in connected care activity and supplies, the actual cost difference is not known. Nursing and provider staff time was prospectively recorded for all patients enrolled in the OB Nest clinical trial. Published 2015 national wages for healthcare workers were used to calculate the actual labor cost of providing either traditional or OB Nest prenatal care in 2015 US dollars. Overhead expenses and opportunity costs were not considered.
resultsTotal provider cost was decreased caring for the OB Nest participants, but nursing cost was increased. OB Nest care required an average of 160.8 (+/- 45.0) minutes provider time and 237 (+/- 25.1) minutes nursing time, compared to 215.0 (+/- 71.6) and 99.6 (+/- 29.7) minutes for traditional prenatal care (P < 0.01). This translated into decreased provider cost and increased nursing cost (P < 0.01). Supply costs increased, travel costs declined, and overhead costs declined in the OB Nest model.
conclusionsIn this trial, labor cost for OB Nest prenatal care was 34% higher than for traditional prenatal care. The increased cost is largely attributable to additional nursing connected care time, and in some practice settings may be offset by decreased overhead costs and increased provider billing opportunities. Future efforts will be focused on development of digital solutions for some routine nursing tasks to decrease the overall cost of the model. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02082275 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.