Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics
Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 5/2016

01-11-2016 | Maternal-Fetal Medicine

Pregnancy eHealth and mHealth: user proportions and characteristics of pregnant women using Web-based information sources—a cross-sectional study

Authors: Stephanie Wallwiener, Mitho Müller, Anne Doster, Wolfgang Laserer, Corinna Reck, Jan Pauluschke-Fröhlich, Sara Y. Brucker, Christian W. Wallwiener, Markus Wallwiener

Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics | Issue 5/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To analyze the current proportions and characteristics of women using Internet (eHealth) and smartphone (mHealth) based sources of information during pregnancy and to investigate the influence, this information-seeking behavior has on decision-making.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted at two major German university hospitals. Questionnaires covering socio-demographic data, medical data and details of Internet, and smartphone application use were administered to 220 pregnant women. Data analysis utilized descriptive statistics and multiple regression analysis.

Results

50.7 % of pregnant women were online information seekers. 22.4 % used an mHealth pregnancy application. Women using eHealth information showed no specific profile, while women using mHealth applications proved to be younger, were more likely to be in their first pregnancy, felt less healthy, and were more likely to be influenced by the retrieved information. Stepwise backward regression analysis explained 25.8 % of the variance of mHealth use. 80.5 % of cases were classified correctly by the identified predictors. All types of Web-based information correlated significantly with decision-making during pregnancy.

Conclusions

Pregnant women frequently use the Internet and smartphone applications as a source of information. While Web usage was a common phenomenon, this study revealed specific characteristics of mHealth users during pregnancy. Improved, medically accurate smartphone applications might provide a way to specifically target the mHealth user group. As user influenceability was of major relevance to all types of information, all medical content should be carefully reviewed by a multidisciplinary board of medical specialists.
Literature
1.
McCann AD, McCulloch JE (2012) Establishing an online and social media presence for your IBCLC practice. J Hum Lact 28(4):450–454CrossRefPubMed
2.
3.
Lima-Pereira P, Bermúdez-Tamayo C, Jasienska G (2012) Use of the Internet as a source of health information amongst participants of antenatal classes. J Clin Nurs 21(3–4):322–330CrossRefPubMed
4.
Lorence D, Park H (2006) Web-based consumer health information: public access, digital division, and remainders. MedGenMed 8(2):4PubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Bert F, Gualano MR, Brusaferro S, de Vito E, de Waure C, La Torre G, Manzoli L, Messina G, Todros T, Torregrossa MV, Siliquini R (2013) Pregnancy e-health: a multicenter Italian cross-sectional study on internet use and decision-making among pregnant women. J Epidemiol Commun Health 67(12):1013–1018CrossRef
6.
Bernhardt JM, Felter EM (2004) Online pediatric information seeking among mothers of young children: results from a qualitative study using focus groups. J Med Internet Res 6(1):e7CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Gao L, Larsson M, Luo S (2013) Internet use by Chinese women seeking pregnancy-related information. Midwifery 29(7):730–735CrossRefPubMed
8.
Johnson SA (2015) ‘Intimate mothering publics’: comparing face-to-face support groups and internet use for women seeking information and advice in the transition to first-time motherhood. Cult Health Sex 17(2):237–251CrossRefPubMed
9.
Tamrat T, Kachnowski S (2012) Special delivery: an analysis of mHealth in maternal and newborn health programs and their outcomes around the world. Matern Child Health J 16(5):1092–1101CrossRefPubMed
10.
11.
Bert F, Passi S, Scaioli G, Gualano MR, Siliquini R (2015) There comes a baby! What should I do? Smartphones’ pregnancy-related applications: a web-based overview. Health Inform J. doi:10.​1177/​1460458215574120​
12.
Krieger T, Meyer B, Sude K, Urech A, Maercker A, Berger T (2014) Evaluating an e-mental health program (“deprexis”) as adjunctive treatment tool in psychotherapy for depression: design of a pragmatic randomized controlled trial. BMC Psychiatry 14:285CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Lupton D (2015) Health promotion in the digital era: a critical commentary. Health Promot Int 30(1):174–183CrossRefPubMed
14.
Lupton D, Jutel A (1982) ‘It’s like having a physician in your pocket!’ A critical analysis of self-diagnosis smartphone apps. Soc Sci Med 2015(133):128–135
15.
Nyamtema AS, Urassa DP, van Roosmalen J (2011) Maternal health interventions in resource limited countries: a systematic review of packages, impacts and factors for change. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 11:30CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Mechael P, Nemser B, Cosmaciuc R, Cole-Lewis H, Ohemeng-Dapaah S, Dusabe S, Kaonga NN, Namakula P, Shemsanga M, Burbach R, Kanter AS (2012) Capitalizing on the characteristics of mHealth to evaluate its impact. J Health Commun 17(Suppl 1):62–66CrossRefPubMed
17.
Bert F, Giacometti M, Gualano MR, Siliquini R (2014) Smartphones and health promotion: a review of the evidence. J Med Syst 38(1):9995CrossRefPubMed
18.
Black AD, Car J, Pagliari C, Anandan C, Cresswell K, Bokun T, McKinstry B, Procter R, Majeed A, Sheikh A (2011) The impact of eHealth on the quality and safety of health care: a systematic overview. PLoS Med 8(1):e1000387CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
Berland GK, Elliott MN, Morales LS, Algazy JI, Kravitz RL, Broder MS, Kanouse DE, Muñoz JA, Puyol JA, Lara M, Watkins KE, Yang H, McGlynn EA (2001) Health information on the internet: accessibility, quality, and readability in English and Spanish. JAMA 285(20):2612–2621CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Sinni SV, Cross WM, Swanson AE, Wallace EM (2016) Measuring pregnancy care: towards better maternal and child health. Austr N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 56(2):142–147CrossRef
21.
Alcayaga C, Pérez JC, Bustamante C, Campos S, Lange I, Zuñiga F (2014) Plan piloto del sistema de comunicación y seguimiento móvil en salud para personas con diabetes (Pilot plan for a mobile health communication and monitoring system for people with diabetes). Rev Panam Salud Pública (Pan Am J Public Health) 35(5–6):458–464
22.
Rodrigues R, Bogg L, Shet A, Kumar DS, de Costa A (2014) Mobile phones to support adherence to antiretroviral therapy: what would it cost the Indian National AIDS Control Programme? J Int AIDS Soc 17:19036CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
Rezniczek GA, Küppers L, Heuer H, Hefler LA, Buerkle B, Tempfer CB (2015) Quality of websites of obstetrics and gynecology departments: a cross-sectional study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 15(1):103CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Jo Y, Labrique AB, Lefevre AE, Mehl G, Pfaff T, Walker N, Friberg IK (2014) Using the lives saved tool (LiST) to model mHealth impact on neonatal survival in resource-limited settings. PLoS One 9(7):e102224CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Abroms LC, Johnson PR, Heminger CL, Van Alstyne JM, Leavitt LE, Schindler-Ruwisch JM, Bushar JA (2015) Quit4baby: results from a pilot test of a mobile smoking cessation program for pregnant women. JMIR mHealth uHealth 3(1):e10. doi:10.​2196/​mhealth.​3846
26.
BinDhim NF, Shaman AM, Trevena L, Basyouni MH, Pont LG, Alhawassi TM (2015) Depression screening via a smartphone app: cross-country user characteristics and feasibility. J Am Med Inform Assoc 22(1):29–34PubMed
27.
Dunford E, Trevena H, Goodsell C, Ng KH, Webster J, Millis A, Goldstein S, Hugueniot O, Neal B (2014) FoodSwitch: a mobile phone app to enable consumers to make healthier food choices and crowdsourcing of national food composition data. JMIR mHealth uHealth 2(3):e37CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
Wallwiener M, Wallwiener CW, Kansy JK, Seeger H, Rajab TK (2009) Impact of electronic messaging on the patient–physician interaction. J Telemed Telecare 15(5):243–250CrossRefPubMed
29.
Bauer AM, Rue T, Keppel GA, Cole AM, Baldwin L, Katon W (2014) Use of mobile health (mHealth) tools by primary care patients in the WWAMI region practice and research network (WPRN). J Am Board Fam Med JABFM 27(6):780–788CrossRefPubMed
30.
Peragallo Urrutia R, Berger AA, Ivins AA, Beckham AJ, Thorp JM, Nicholson WK (2015) Internet use and access among pregnant women via computer and mobile phone: implications for delivery of perinatal care. JMIR mHealth uHealth 3(1):e25
31.
Fayers PM, Sprangers MA, Mirjam AG (2002) Understanding self-rated health. Lancet 359(9302):187–188CrossRefPubMed
32.
Nahapiet J, Ghoshal S (1997) Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage: University of St. Andrews. Centre for Research into Industry, Enterprise, and the Firm, Castlecliffe
33.
Bortz J, Weber R (2005) Statistik: Für Human- und Sozialwissenschaftler. Sechste, vollständig überarbeitete und aktualisierte Auflage. Springer, Berlin (ISBN 9783540264309)
34.
de Santis M, de Luca C, Quattrocchi T, Visconti D, Cesari E, Mappa I, Nobili E, Spagnuolo T, Caruso A (2010) Use of the internet by women seeking information about potentially teratogenic agents. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 151(2):154–157CrossRefPubMed
35.
Kraschnewski JL, Chuang CH, Poole ES, Peyton T, Blubaugh I, Pauli J, Feher A, Reddy M (2014) Paging, “Dr. Google”: does technology fill the gap created by the prenatal care visit structure? Qualitative focus group study with pregnant women. J Med Internet Res 16(6):e147CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
36.
Lagan BM, Sinclair M, Kernohan WG (2010) Internet use in pregnancy informs women’s decision making: a web-based survey. Birth (Berkeley, Calif) 37(2):106–115
37.
Johnson SA (2014) Maternal devices”, social media and the self-management of pregnancy, mothering and child health. Societies 4:330–350. doi:10.​3390/​soc4020330
38.
Palosse-Cantaloube L, Lacroix I, Rousseau V, Bagheri H, Montastruc J, Damase-Michel C (2014) Analysis of chats on French internet forums about drugs and pregnancy. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 23(12):1330–1333CrossRefPubMed
39.
40.
41.
Metadata
Title
Pregnancy eHealth and mHealth: user proportions and characteristics of pregnant women using Web-based information sources—a cross-sectional study
Authors
Stephanie Wallwiener
Mitho Müller
Anne Doster
Wolfgang Laserer
Corinna Reck
Jan Pauluschke-Fröhlich
Sara Y. Brucker
Christian W. Wallwiener
Markus Wallwiener
Publication date
01-11-2016
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics / Issue 5/2016
Print ISSN: 0932-0067
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0711
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-016-4093-y

Other articles of this Issue 5/2016

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 5/2016 Go to the issue

Maternal-Fetal Medicine

Morgagni hernia presenting with massive pericardial effusion and ascites: prenatal management by thoraco-amniotic shunting and fetal endoscopic tracheal occlusion (FETO) and review of the literature

Gynecologic Oncology

Female breast cancer burden was increasing during the 40 years in Hebei Province, China: a population-based study

Gynecologic Oncology

Metformin targeting autophagy overcomes progesterone resistance in endometrial carcinoma

Maternal-Fetal Medicine

Single-knot versus multiple-knot technique of perineal repair: a randomised controlled trial

Review

Regulation of apoptotic pathways during endometriosis: from the molecular basis to the future perspectives

Maternal-Fetal Medicine

Color Doppler examination for the diagnosis of subacute puerperal uterine inversion