Ms Sharon Hu1, Professor Angela Makris2,3, Professor Annemarie Hennessy1,4, Dr Theepika Rajkumar1,4
1Western Sydney University, Campbelltown, Australia, 2University of New South Wales, Kensington, Australia, 3Department of Renal Medicine, Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool, Australia, 4Department of Medicine, Campbelltown Hospital, Campbelltown, Australia
Biography:
Biographies to come
Abstract:
Background: Remote blood pressure monitoring (RBPM) has shown promise in clinical trials for surveilling hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. RBPM refers to an organised framework that allows clinicians to review home-based blood pressure readings and institute management, yet its successful incorporation into antenatal care requires consideration of the context, stakeholders and healthcare system.
Aim: To evaluate the perceptions of high-risk pregnant women and their clinicians towards RBPM for the surveillance of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy.
Methods: Two web-based questionnaires were distributed to pregnant women and clinicians at high-risk antenatal clinics of Campbelltown, Liverpool and Bankstown Hospitals. Clinicians across Australia and New Zealand were included. Quantitative Likert scales and qualitative open-ended questions were used to ascertain perceptions about RBPM.
Results: Seventy-six women of varied socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds were surveyed. Almost all women (97.4%) thought RBPM would help their healthcare team make better decisions, and 96.1% would be happy to add RBPM to their antenatal care, particularly those with less time off from paid employment (p<0.01). Only 9.2% of women felt mobile applications were not safe and secure with private information, predominantly older women with more children (p=0.02) and lower annual income (p=0.04). Women from a non-English speaking background and those with lower annual income were more likely to perceive RBPM as difficult to use (p=0.01 and p=0.02 respectively). Sixty-five clinicians of varied ethnic backgrounds and experience were surveyed. The majority (72.3%) felt RBPM could improve patient care decisions, with male clinicians particularly optimistic about RBPM’s clinical utility (p=0.02). Older clinicians were more likely to perceive RBPM as difficult to use (p<0.01).
Conclusion: High-risk pregnant women and clinicians are broadly receptive to the potential introduction of RBPM into antenatal care, predicting it will be clinically useful. Socioeconomic status, age and gender influenced perceptions of both women and clinicians towards RBPM.
Keywords
antenatal, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, pregnant women, remote blood pressure monitoring, questionnaire
References
Kalafat E, Benlioglu C, Thilaganathan B, Khalil A. Home blood pressure monitoring in the antenatal and postpartum period: A systematic review meta-analysis. Pregnancy Hypertens. 2020;19:44-51.
Kalafat E, Leslie K, Bhide A, Thilaganathan B, Khalil A. Pregnancy outcomes following home blood pressure monitoring in gestational hypertension. Pregnancy Hypertens. 2019;18:14-20.
Butler Tobah YS, LeBlanc A, Branda ME, Inselman JW, Morris MA, Ridgeway JL, et al. Randomized comparison of a reduced-visit prenatal care model enhanced with remote monitoring. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 2019;221(6):638.e1-.e8.