Table 1 Models of telehealth in obstetrics published since 2020
From: Telehealth in antenatal care: recent insights and advances
Author | Centre | Population | Model | Remote monitoring | Proposed number of visits—in-person | Proposed number of visits—telehealth |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aziz et al. [15] | Columbia University Irving Medical Centre (USA) | High-risk pregnancies | Based on existing antenatal care model; supplementing face-to-face visits with virtual visits conducted with online videoconferencing software | Yes—ambulatory blood pressure, remote glucose monitoring. | 6 in-person visits (11–13wk; 18–22wk; 27–28wk; 36wk; 39wk; 40wk) | 7–8 telehealth visits (intake; 11–14wk; 23–26wk; 29–31wk; 32–35wk; 37wk; 38wk) |
Dosaj et al. [16] | University of Illinois at Chicago (USA) | Low-risk pregnancies | Based on existing antenatal care model; supplementing face-to-face visits with virtual visits conducted with online videoconferencing software | Yes—ambulatory blood pressure as indicated, fetal Doppler as indicated | 7 face-to-face visits (12wk; 20wk; 28wk; 32wk; 36wk; 38wk; 40wk) | 6+ telehealth visits (intake; 12–28wk as necessary; 30wk; 34wk; 37wk; 39wk) |
Duryea et al. [22] | Parkland Hospital, Dallas, TX (USA) | Low-risk and high-risk pregnancies | Based on existing antenatal care model; supplementing face-to-face visits with virtual visits conducted with online videoconferencing software | No | 10 face-to-face visits (10wk; 18–20wk; 24wk; 28wk; 32wk; 36wk; 38wk; 39wk; 40wk; 41wk) | 3 telehealth visits (14wk; 34wk; 37wk) |
Fryer et al. [18] | Hillsborough County, FL (USA) | Low-risk pregnancies | The ‘OB Nest Model’ | Yes—ambulatory blood pressure, remote fetal Doppler | 6 face-to-face visits (10–14wk; 20-22wk; 27–28wk; 35–36wk; 39wk; 40–41wk) | 5 telehealth visits (6–10wk; 15–19wk; 23–26wk; 29–34wk; 37–38wk) |
Limaeye et al. [23] | NYU Langone Health (USA) | Low-risk and high-risk pregnancies | Based on existing antenatal care model; supplementing face-to-face visits with virtual visits conducted with online videoconferencing software | No | 6 face-to-face visits (11–14wk; 20–22wk; 27–28wk; 36wk; 38wk; 40wk) | 7 telehealth visits (6–10wk; 15–19wk; 23–26wk; 29–31wk; 32–35wk; 37wk; 39wk) |
Nakagawa et al. [21] | Hokkaido University Hospital (Japan) | Low-risk and high-risk pregnancies | Based on existing antenatal care model; supplementing face-to-face visits with virtual visits conducted with online videoconferencing software | Yes—ambulatory blood pressure, remote cardiotocography | 5 face-to-face visits (12wk; 20wk; 24wk; 30wk; 36wk) | Variable number of telehealth visits (all other appointments as needed) |
Palmer et al. [20] | Monash Health (Australia) | Low-risk pregnancies | Based on existing antenatal care model; supplementing face-to-face visits with virtual visits conducted with online videoconferencing software | Yes—ambulatory blood pressure, self-measured symphysial fundal height | 3 face-to-face visits (28wk; 36wk; ≥ 40wk) | 6 telehealth visits (intake; 16wk; 22wk; 31wk; 34wk; 38wk) |
Palmer et al. [20] | Monash Health (Australia) | High-risk pregnancies | Based on existing antenatal care model; supplementing face-to-face visits with virtual visits conducted with online videoconferencing software | Yes—ambulatory blood pressure, self-measured symphysial fundal height | 5 face-to-face visits (16–18wk; 28wk; 36wk; 38wk; ≥ 40wk) | 5 telehealth visits (intake with midwife; intake with obstetrician; 22wk; 31wk; 34wk) |
Peahl et al. [17] | University of Michigan (USA) | Low-risk pregnancies | The ‘4-1-4 Model’ | No | 5 face-to-face visits (8wk; 19wk; 28wk; 36wk; 39wk) | 4 telehealth visits (16wk; 24wk; 38wk; 38wk) |
Tavener et al. [19] | Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust (UK) | Low-risk pregnancies | Based on existing reduced antenatal care model; supplementing face-to-face visits with virtual visits conducted with online videoconferencing software | No | 8 face-to-face visits (14wk; 20wk; 28wk; 32wk; 36wk; 38wk; 40wk; 41wk) | 2 telehealth visits (intake; 16wk) |