Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Formative Research

Date Submitted: Mar 9, 2022
Open Peer Review Period: Mar 9, 2022 - May 4, 2022
Date Accepted: Jun 29, 2022
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Information Resources Among Flemish Pregnant Women: Cross-sectional Study

Lanssens D, Thijs I, Dreesen P, Van Hecke A, Coorevits P, Gaethofs G, Derycke J, Tency I

Information Resources Among Flemish Pregnant Women: Cross-sectional Study

JMIR Form Res 2022;6(10):e37866

DOI: 10.2196/37866

PMID: 36222794

PMCID: 9597425

INFORMATION RESOURCES AMONG FLEMISH PREGNANT WOMEN: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY

  • Dorien Lanssens; 
  • Inge Thijs; 
  • Pauline Dreesen; 
  • Ann Van Hecke; 
  • Pascal Coorevits; 
  • Gitte Gaethofs; 
  • Joyce Derycke; 
  • Inge Tency

ABSTRACT

Background:

There is an exponential growth in the availability of mobile Health (mHealth) applications, resulting in increased use of pregnancy apps. However, the actual use, experience, and characteristics of women using pregnancy apps are relatively unknown.

Objective:

To map the current use of the Internet and mobile applications and the needs and expectations among pregnant women in Flanders.

Methods:

A cross-sectional study was conducted, using a semi-structured survey (April - June 2019) consisting of four different domains: (1) demographics; (2) use of multimedia; (3) sources of information; and (4) use of pregnancy apps. Women were recruited by social media, flyers, and paper questionnaires at prenatal consultations. Statistical analysis was mainly focused on descriptive statistics. Differences in continuous and categorical variables were tested using Independent Student’s t-tests and Chi-square tests. Correlations were investigated between maternal characteristics and the women’s responses.

Results:

In total, 311 women fulfilled the questionnaire completely. The majority of multimedia were daily used by the women (computer/laptop 40,84%; GSM: 80,71%; and smartphone/iPhone: 97,43%). The obstetrician was their prior source of information (86.17%), followed by ‘websites/Internet’ (85.85%) and ‘apps’ (74.92%). Information was mostly searched about the development of the baby (88.45%), discomfort/complaints (80.71%) and health during pregnancy (79.74%), administrative/practical issues (74.92%) and breastfeeding (56.59%). About half of the women (55.31%) downloaded a pregnancy app (172/311), mostly searched app stores (43.02%; 74/172). Singleton pregnancies asked significantly more information to their mother (73.33%) or other family members (43.33%) than married women (mother (in law): 51.26% (p= 0.02); family members: 21.88% (p = 0.01)) or cohabiting women (mother (in law): 50.00% (p = 0.02)). Pregnant women with lower education had significantly more a pc or laptop than those with higher education (98.63% vs. 85.47%; p = 0.008), consulted more other family members for pregnancy information (41.10% vs. 23.08%; p <0.01) but less a gynaecologist (95.89% vs. 83.54%; p = 0.001), followed more prenatal sessions (80.77% vs. 32.48%; p = 0.04) and searched more for information on discomfort/complains during pregnancy (89.04% vs. 79.49%; p = 0.02). Compared to multigravida, primigravida asked more advice about their pregnancy to their environment (family members: primigravida: 40.37% vs. multigravida 20.10%; p < 0.001; or other pregnant women: primigravida: 53.21% vs. multigravida 40.20%; p < 0.03).

Conclusions:

Healthcare professionals need to be aware that mHealth apps are important and are a growing source of information for pregnant women. Concerns rise about the quality and safety of those apps, as only a limited amount of apps are subjected to an external quality check. Therefore, it is important that caregivers refer to high quality digital resources and take the opportunity to discuss digital information with pregnant women. Clinical Trial: The study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committees of the hospital Oost-Limburg (no. 19/0026U, B-no. B371201939699) and Ghent University hospital (EC 2018/0120, B-no. B670201835156).


 Citation

Please cite as:

Lanssens D, Thijs I, Dreesen P, Van Hecke A, Coorevits P, Gaethofs G, Derycke J, Tency I

Information Resources Among Flemish Pregnant Women: Cross-sectional Study

JMIR Form Res 2022;6(10):e37866

DOI: 10.2196/37866

PMID: 36222794

PMCID: 9597425

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.