Discussion
The results of the study showed that from the participants' perspectives, the technical feasibility of applying mobile-based technologies was more than applying web-based technologies to provide healthcare services for high-risk pregnancies. In fact, in both groups of midwives and gynaecologists, the mean value for the technical feasibility of using mobile-based technologies was higher than using the web-based technologies. Such a result can be attributed to the growth and spread of applying mobile phones and mobile-based applications in the country and around the world. So that, mobile-based technologies are more acceptable for providing healthcare services.14 The results are in line with the findings of similar studies in which the use of mobile-based technologies for providing education and healthcare services have been highlighted.14–20 It is notable that web-based technologies have their own advantages and pregnant women can use both web-based and mobile-based technologies to receive healthcare services and information.20 21 However, the mobile-based technologies have some features, such as ease of use anywhere and anytime that is needed. Moreover, the availability of technical infrastructure and the possibility of creating diverse applications are among the main reasons for considering mobile-based technologies more feasible than web-based technologies for the high- risk pregnancies.11 22 Similarly, Pérez-Ferre et al showed that both web-based and mobile-based technologies can be used effectively to improve care for pregnant women.7
In terms of the operational aspect, the results showed that from the participants’ perspectives applying mobile-based technologies was more feasible than applying web-based technologies. The operational aspect includes a number of issues, such as patients’ satisfaction and technology acceptance, provision of healthcare services by the specialists, quality of services, speed of care delivery, ease of use, cost of providing healthcare services, the possibility of workload reduction for healthcare providers, women’s information literacy, the appropriateness of content and receiving adequate support from the Ministry of Health. It seems that addressing the above mentioned issues is easier by using mobile-based technologies based on the participants’ perspectives. The results also showed that there was a statistically significant difference between the feasibility of applying mobile-based technologies and web-based technologies in terms of the operational aspects from the midwives' perspectives and the use of mobile-based technologies was more feasible. However, there was no statistically significant difference between applying these two technologies from the gynaecologists' perspectives. Such a difference between the opinions of gynaecologists and midwives can be attributed to the nature of the tasks and the extent to which they were responsible for caring for a pregnant woman. It seems that midwives can communicate and monitor their patients more easily by using mobile phones or by using mobile-based applications, since they have more contact with pregnant women than gynaecologists.
In terms of the economic aspect, the results showed that although in both groups applying mobile-based technologies was found to be more feasible than applying web-based technologies, overall, no statistically significant difference was found between applying these two technologies in terms of the economic aspect. Similarly, other studies show that there is no significant difference between applying web-based and mobile-based technologies in terms of economic aspect.28 29 However, in general, telemedicine is expected to reduce costs in high-risk pregnancies.30 31
The results of this study also indicated that from the midwives' perspectives considering scheduling aspects was more feasible for mobile-based technologies than for web-based technologies and from the gynaecologists' perspectives, this feasibility was reverse. However, in general, no statistically significant difference was found between scheduling for implementing web-based and mobile-based applications. According to the participants, both technologies needed to be defined as a long or short term project and adequate time should be spent for any of these projects.
According to the results, the midwives believed that the feasibility of applying ethicolegal aspects was higher by using mobile-based technologies compared with web-based technologies. In contrast, the gynaecologists assumed that web-based technologies were more feasible to be used to address ethicolegal issues. Overall, the results showed that there was a statistically significant difference between these two technologies and applying mobile-based technologies was more feasible than web-based technologies. Avancha et al noted that despite the benefits of using mobile-based technology to improve patient care, protecting patient privacy is essential.32 In fact, the protection of privacy and confidentiality in mobile-based applications is complex, as mobile phones collect patient information continuously and sharing information is much wider and easier. Therefore, developing guidelines to increase patient confidence and privacy should be taken into account before applying telemedicine technologies.32 Similarly, Kotz et al indicated that although mobile-based technologies provide a number of opportunities for improving the quality of life and healthcare services, the security and privacy issues should not be underestimated.33 Overall, the results showed that applying mobile-based technology was significantly more feasible than applying web-based technologies and both groups of midwives and gynaecologists agreed on that.
Research limitation
One of the limitations of the current research was related to the limited number of the participants. Although the overall response rate seemed to be good, the number of the gynaecologists who took part in the study was limited. However, the results showed that both groups of the participants had relatively similar ideas regarding different aspects of using both technologies. The second limitation might be related to not including the high risk pregnants in the study. In fact, the current research was a feasibility study which aimed to uncover the strengths and weaknesses, opportunities and threats of a proposed technology, the required resources and ultimately the prospects for success. Therefore, the researchers preferred to include those participants who could assess the possibility, efficiency and effectiveness of applying these technologies with respect to the technical and non-technical aspects. The perception of patients regarding the use of the web or mobile technologies in high-risk pregnancies can be investigated in other future studies.